Thanks for the comments, Mick. Yes, I think you are correct in what you have to say about versioned vs non-versioned docs for the website. It's such an obvious comment that I can only say I must have been half-asleep when Anthony and I discussed the topic. (Maybe he was, too!)
Since Antora is one of the static site generators known for generating content from multiple repo sources, I think I see the way forward better, and will go back to work on it again. Lorina On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:26 AM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > As part of the work, I think all content files should be moved to > > cassandra/doc. This would give a clear separation of concerns; > > - cassandra/doc contains the material (asciidoc) that is converted to > the > > website content. > > - cassandra-website hosts the live content and contains all the UI > > resources (html templates, css, js, images) that style the content. > > > > Document authors only need to touch one repository to make content edits. > > > > How would this work when you have one version of cassandra-website and > multiple versions of the in-tree docs. > > The in-tree docs (cassandra/doc/) is tied to each C* version. Folk want to > look up the documentation specific to the version they are using. While the > cassandra-website docs are for everything not specific to a C* version. > > And there are multiple versions of the in-tree docs hosted underneath the > cassandra-website docs, see `asf-staging` and `asf-site` branches. Putting > this in the main repo would make clones bigger. And there's also the issue > of Antora being under MPL and we have to be strict about not distributing > any of its files in any of our releases. > > I would have suggested instead, moving as much of the non-version-specific > content to cassandra-website… > > regards, > Mick >
