On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Christian Balzer <ch...@gol.com> wrote:
> Then we come to a typical problem for fast evolving SW like Ceph, things > that are not present in older versions. I was going to post on this too (I had similar frustrations), and would like to propose that a move to splitting the documentation by versions: OLD http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/cache-tiering/ NEW http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/hammer/rados/operations/cache-tiering/ http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/infernalis/rados/operations/cache-tiering/ http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/jewel/rados/operations/cache-tiering/ and so on. When a new version is started, the documentation should be 100% cloned and the tree restructured around the version. It could equally be a drop-down on the page to select the version. Postgres for example uses a similar mechanism: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ Note the version numbers are embedded in the URL. I like their commenting mechanism too as it provides a running narrative of changes that should be considered as practice develops around things to do or avoid. Once the documentation is cloned for the new version, all the inapplicable material should be removed and the new features/practice changes should be added.
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
