Are you saying that the source document for the PDF is also attached to the issue? I don't see it in KAFKA-50.
Regards, Alan On Jul 20, 2011, at 10:11 AM, Jakob Homan wrote: > I don't have anything against wikis - they're great for information > that changes more frequently than releases are made and should be > user-facing (configuration, FAQs, etc). > > For large technical changes, like the one currently being propsosed, > the PDF isn't static, but will have several versions posted. The > whole discussion is: PDF version 0, then comments on that PDF, then > PDFv1, then more discussions until eventually the discussion turns > into +1s and the final version of the PDF is attached. The JIRA does > a good job of chronicling the discussion that wiki change logs > doesn't. JIRA just seems like a more natural forum to spur > discussion. > > Also, having the person driving the change updating the document tends > to keep the discussion on track and making progress. > > Finally, new or less senior members of the community may be reluctant > to edit a semi-official project document like a wiki, but hopefully > will be willing to join in the discussion on JIRA. > -jg > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Jul 20, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Jakob Homan wrote: >> >>>>> and then just comment and iterate over there. Is that not the preferred >>>>> way? >>>> >>>> No, that's very bad. There's no way that others can participate and >>>> modify the design. >>>> >>> >>> How so? The documentation is online and the discussion is online and >>> recorded for posterity. The only barrier to entry to the discussion is >>> setting up a JIRA account. >> >> The design document should be open to the community to edit. Not a frozen >> PDF document. I'll turn the question around. What problem do you see >> storing the document in a wiki format? >> >> >> Regards, >> Alan >> >>
