I would like it if we move towards having a version of the complete documentation for each release. The documentation for each release can be published on the main website, similar to what Apache Spark does: http://spark.apache.org/documentation.html
By the way, this will mean that when we do a release, one task will be to make sure that the documentation for that release is up-to-date. Deron On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Frederick R Reiss <[email protected]> wrote: > Having a separate language reference for each version is a good idea. > Eventually we will have users running backlevel versions of the system. We > can cover that need by adding an "archive the current state of the > documentation" step to our release process. > > Fred > > Sent from my iPhone using IBM Verse > > On Jun 21, 2016, 9:40:31 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Date: Jun 21, 2016 9:40:31 PM > Subject: [DISCUSS] Version-specific documentation > > > In the context of SYSTEMML-554, we aim to introduce native frame data > type > support. While porting the file-based transform, I intend to drop the > existing transform scaling functionality (mean substraction, z-scoring) > as > it is more naturally expressed over matrices. However, this change > raises a > general question with regard to our documentation: > How do you feel about maintaining version-specific language references? > It > would certainly help to avoid version-specific conflicts (e.g., builtin > functions added in newer versions) but it might add overhead as fixes > would > need to go into multiple versions. Personally, I would be in favor of > simply archiving the old documentation (but keeping it available) as > part > of our release process. > Regards, > Matthias >
