+1 It can also enable different kind of contributions than the ones on the code itself.
Regards, -clr -----Original Message----- From: Amanda Moran [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 3:18 PM To: dev <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Website Updates +1 Makes sense to me. Thanks Gunnar. On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Gunnar Tapper <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > As it turns out, we immediately hit issues with having the website as > part of the product source tree. > > The website is really a standalone entity that operates at a different > speed than the product and that should be on a different release > schedule than the overall product. > > The speed issue is that the review-then-commit model has long delays > built in, which are counter productive for website development (since > that development tends to be sporatic and clustered) thereby slowing > down the updates and and forcing huge commits instead of incremental > commits. The tie to a release is really odd since a website update is > forcefully tied to a product release in such a model. A workaround > would be to publish the content of the docs/target directory before > the in-progress release is done, which doesn't really follow the > spirit of release versions. If anything, the website should have it's own > version scheme. > > Given the precedence of other projects separating out the website and > documentation, then it seems reasonable to do the same from Trafodion. > I assume that the committers votes on this? Is a Jira needed or some > other approach? > > Thanks, > > Gunnar > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Dave Birdsall > <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Just thinking out loud. > > > > Pros to keeping just one repository: > > > > Makes it possible to update code and web site in one pull request. I > don't > > know anyone who is doing that now however. Longer term, though, we > > will want to encourage documentation to be updated alongside code so > > this may be > the > > direction we want to go. > > > > Makes it easier to have a notion of code + web site being on the > > same release thread. Of course that can still be done with separate > > repositories; it is just twice the work from an infrastructure > > perspective. > > > > Pros for having separate repositories: > > > > Makes it easier for the web site to be "pan-release". For example, > > one > can > > maintain separate pages for past releases and pages for future releases. > > > > It might be interesting to inquire of other projects why they do > > things > the > > way they do. > > > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gunnar Tapper [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 3:59 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Website Updates > > > > Hi folks: > > > > I'm working on updating the website. As I look around, I find that > > some projects seem to have a separate repository for the website. I > > assume > that > > it's so that the website can be updated asynchronously from the > > actual project. > > > > Examples: > > > > > > - http://phoenix.apache.org/building_website.html > > - https://geode.incubator.apache.org/contribute/ > > > > > > What would be the pros and cons you'd see for Apache Trafodion? Is > > anyone dead against a separate repository for the website? > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > > > Gunnar > > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.* > > > > > > -- > Thanks, > > Gunnar > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.* > -- Thanks, Amanda Moran
