Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

+1 I really like GitBook, really great work! Thomas and Richard! Splitting it is also a good idea. Thanks! On 16 October 2017 at 16:35, Thomas Bouron wrote: > Hi all. > > I pushed a PR[1] for the split. I went down this road because I think the > docs should

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Hi all. I pushed a PR[1] for the split. I went down this road because I think the docs should closely follow the code, therefore it makes sense that they should live on `master`. The website will be put onto a different branch TBC. The PR is, *ahem*, huge due to the nature of the change. I don't

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

+1 I think this format of docs is a massive improvement on the previous, really great work! Splitting it is also a good idea. I'm not a massive fan of putting the docs and website on different branches, I think this can obscure things. For the short term this might be a reasonable way to proceed

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

All, As a co-conspirator on this I am obviously +1 to it :-) But it would be good to hear some more POVs on this. Thomas and I (mostly Thomas) have come up with a solution which we believe has "feature parity" with the current docs solution, except for some cases where we believe the feature is

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Hi all. I just pushed the last set of commits to my fork for the docs[1]. This now contains the docs generated by gitbook and a build script[2] to generate the javadoc at the right place (i.e. misc/javadoc). The last commit[3] updates the README to include the updated release instructions. With

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Hi Alex, all. For the past few days, I worked with Richard on this doc spike. Here is a short summary of what we have done: - add collapse/expandable sections on the left menu - add documentation versioning (version dropdown, top left) - improve PDF output - fix all internal links - use brooklyn

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Thomas- Had a deeper look -- gitbook has moved things forward a lot. Sounds like it will let us throw away a lot of our home-grown docs-building and toc-building code and have good search. Look forward to seeing how it shapes up with styling and guide-v-website integration. Best Alex On

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Thomas this looks really clean great work. How much work do you think it will take to maintain vs our current solution? What do you see as being the current feature gaps? M On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 at 14:55 Thomas Bouron wrote: > Hi Richard. > > Of course, I pushed

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Hi Richard. Of course, I pushed it to my fork on the branch `experiment/gitbook`[1] Glad you like it :) Best. [1] https://github.com/tbouron/brooklyn-docs/tree/experiment/gitbook On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 at 13:53 Andrea Turli wrote: > +1 Thomas, didn't know Gitbook at all

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

+1 Thomas, didn't know Gitbook at all (that's why I suggested readthedocs) but looks pretty good! Il 06/ott/2017 15:37, "Richard Downer" ha scritto: Hi Thomas, I withdraw my previous comments - I looked at ReadTheDocs last year and was pessimistic, but it seems that GitBook

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Hi Thomas, I withdraw my previous comments - I looked at ReadTheDocs last year and was pessimistic, but it seems that GitBook this year is a different story :-) This is worth pursuing IMO. What did you need to do to get this working? Did you have to do any work on the brooklyn-docs source - if

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Hi All. A demo is worth a thousand words so here is a gitbook adaptation of our current documentation[1] (and only documentation) This took me only a couple of hours. There are still things to fix/update/remove like unsupported liquid tags but for the most part, it works like a charm. Search is

Re: [PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Thank you for the research you have done Thomas. I've had similar thoughts myself. The original goal of our web+docs was to integrate them in such a way that we had a versioned user guide that integrated perfectly with the main website. At the time, Markdown tools were relatively immature, with

[PROPOSAL] Split Brooklyn website and documentation

Hi all. It's been a couple of weeks that I started to look at how to improve and simplify the Brookyln website[1]. As I said on the Brooklyn 1.0 thread[2], I think we need to sort this out before releasing 1.0. I have looked for a framework / library to handle both the website and documentation