1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It would be *awesome* to get this working. 2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.
-Jay On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian < srsubraman...@linkedin.com> wrote: > Also, > > 1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of work. > I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first. > 2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that it > goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update > the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good? > > On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking: > >1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation page > >which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You > >could > >imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely > >mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally won't > >change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and > >implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't > >gotten > >there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week. > >2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through > >things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just kind > >of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale > >for repeating the command. > >3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is > >important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look > >under > >"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right > >now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow I > >thought migration was important enough to get its own link. > >4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus > >disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the > >shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think 0.7 > >is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have them > >both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no > >longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older > >releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it > >will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That > >way we don't keep taking up space. > > > >I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to add a > >"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and > >update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements > >let > >me know? > > > >Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that was > >to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to > >read. > >It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put > >yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially new > >to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently. > >Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which was > >extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind of > >executive summary. > > > >-Jay > > > > > > > >On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few > >>comments: > >> > >> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it > >> probably should be added under 0.7. > >> > >> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command is > >> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console > >> producer command twice. > >> > >> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there > >>is > >> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet. > >> > >> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the > >>left > >> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases. > >> > >> Jun > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I > >> > forgot to close the link. > >> > > >> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to > >> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be the > >> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to > >> > be. > >> > > >> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining configs > >> > that was something like: > >> > configs.define(name = "port", > >> > type="int", > >> > max=Int.MaxValue, > >> > min=0, > >> > required=true, > >> > documentation="The port used by the kafka > >> > broker to handle requests.") > >> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method that > >> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more > >> > easily keep the docs in sync. > >> > > >> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated. > >> > > >> > -Jay > >> > > >> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jjkosh...@gmail.com> > >>wrote: > >> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements. > >> > > > >> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration > >> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link) > >> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old scala > >> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and > >> > > informative. The site can drift over time. > >> > > > >> > > Joel > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian > >> > > <srsubraman...@linkedin.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian" > >><srsubraman...@linkedin.com> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections > >>into > >> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still > >>need > >> to > >> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me > >>know > >> if > >> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ. > >> > >>> > >> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added it > >>as > >> a > >> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8. > >> > >>> > >> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It > >>might > >> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian" > >><srsubraman...@linkedin.com> > >> > >>>wrote: > >> > >>> > >> > >>>>Looks much better. > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8 > >> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for implementation. > >> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to. > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>>>Hey Folks, > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes: > >> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running > >>in > >> > >>>>>distributed mode. > >> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit. > >> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs. > >> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page. > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the > >>site, > >> > >>>>>documentation, etc. > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following: > >> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes. > >> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java > >>api > >> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8 > >> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8 > >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>>-Jay > >> > >>>> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >
