On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 09:07PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > Just as a friendly reminder: readme.io hosting still opens us to the > > > issue we've been > > > discussing at length. Namely - the source of the documentation isn't > > > hosted on > > > the Apache premises. I remember there were some conversations with > > > readme.io > > > folks to add some extras for the imports or something like that. Were > there > > > any follow-ups on that front? > > > > > > > Cos, good point. I was actually going to start a thread about this. > > Readme.io actually is replicated in GitHub with by-directional > integration > > here: > > > > https://github.com/apacheignite/documentation > > > > The only thing we need is to move this repository to Apache, with Readme > > application having access to it. If there are no objections, I will > start a > > discussion with INFRA on this. Let me know your thoughts. > > this 'documentation' repo is the official project documentation, as far as > I > remember? If so - yes, let's move it to Apache git. Also, I don't see a > reason to keep it separated from the rest of the source code - it's a part > of the project. And it would be easier to track the documentation relevance > to the releases if they are together, IMO. > I think it should be a separate repo, mainly because we probably should not allow a 3rd party app have write privilege to our main repo. On top of that, readme.io process has already been tested this way and it works (I don't think there is a need to ask them to change it). If we setup a new repo, do you think Apache GIT would allow an external application to connect to it? > If we were to keep it within the project repo, there's no need to involve > INFRA into this - let's just import it and be done with it. > > Cos >
