Did we render webpage with asf-site branch? I didn't recognize it. Yes I meant separate git repository, like 'storm-site'. I'm happy I'm not the only one who feels inconvenient with SVN repo. Would it better to initiate VOTE for this?
Thanks, Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) 2017년 7월 13일 (목) 오전 4:30, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > We were using git before, then a year ago moved back to subversion to > implement versioned documentation [1]. > > If we do decide to move back to git for this, I would recommend using a > separate git repository so it doesn’t bloat our main code repository. When > generating javadoc for a new version, the svn commit to publish the site > can take around 20 minutes. > > -Taylor > > > On Jul 12, 2017, at 10:33 AM, Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi devs, > > > > I think we discussed moving website repository from SVN to GIT from a > long > > time ago, and we were OK on that, but action was not taken. > > > > Now I can see number of projects (Spark, Kafka, Beam, maybe more) are > using > > separate GIT repository for website. > > Although we may still need to have version specific document (doc > > directory) from code repository and copy Jekyll build result to website > > repo, anyone can look at the whole website code and craft pull requests > to > > help us. Git would be more convenient for ourselves than SVN (since we're > > maintaining Storm from GIT). > > > > So I'd like to propose having a new repository 'storm-website' or > > 'storm-site' with 'asf-site' as default branch, and move SVN contents to > > GIT. > > (Sure we need to ask INFRA for helping Storm website to be rendered from > a > > new GIT repo.) > > > > What do you think? > > > > Thanks, > > Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > >
