The introduction and quickstart are all as of 0.8. The design document has not yet been updated (working on it).
-Jay On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:22 AM, S Ahmed <sahmed1...@gmail.com> wrote: > On the main page http://kafka.apache.org/< > http://kafka.apache.org/design.html>, > is the introduction/quickstart/design reflecting 0.8? > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Jay Kreps <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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 > > > >> > >>>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
