Hi, Thanks Ethan for bringing this up, I'm +1 for this change.
Zita Abhishek Pal <pal.abhishek03012...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2024. febr. 10., Szo, 22:43): > Hi Ethan, > Thanks for taking up this initiative. > While this is not a problem for existing committers, I do believe people > who are new to the repo might have some confusion with the current > branching and how GitHub actions builds the site. > I give a +1 vote for this change. > Though we are eventually shifting to a new website, that might take time, > and in the meantime this change will help reduce confusion for any new > contributors as well as address the templating issues. > > On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 at 05:44, Ethan Rose <er...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi Ozone devs, > > > > I’d like to start a vote thread to change the default branch in the > > apache/ozone-site <https://github.com/apache/ozone-site> repo from > > asf-site > > to master. Changing the default branch requires an Infra ticket and > mailing > > thread according to the asfyaml README > > < > > > https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-asfyaml/blob/main/README.md#default-branch > > >. > > I’ll start with some questions you may have when deciding to vote: > > > > *Does this have anything to do with the new website development that is > > happening on the feature branch HDDS-9225-website-v2 > > <https://github.com/apache/ozone-site/tree/HDDS-9225-website-v2>?* > > > > No, this has nothing to do with the new website. The change would be > > effective for the existing website only since it concerns the asf-site > and > > master branches, neither of which the new website uses right now. > > > > *What is the difference between asf-site and master?* > > > > The master branch contains the code that we modify and commit to change > the > > website. The asf-site branch contains the already built website. The > > contents of asf-site are automatically generated from master and > committed > > by a GitHub Action > > < > > > https://github.com/apache/ozone-site/blob/master/.github/workflows/regenerate.yml > > >. > > From there, existing ASF services read the .asf.yml > > <https://github.com/apache/ozone-site/blob/asf-site/.asf.yaml> file in > the > > asf-site branch and copy the built contents from that branch to wherever > > the ASF is hosting the static sites for projects. > > > > *Why should we change the default branch from asf-site to master?* > > > > 1. (My primary motivation) Pull request templates only work if they > > are committed > > to the default branch > > < > > > https://docs.github.com/en/communities/using-templates-to-encourage-useful-issues-and-pull-requests/about-issue-and-pull-request-templates#pull-request-templates > > > > > . > > Committing the PR template from HDDS-10267 > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-10267> to the asf-site > > branch would be clunky and difficult to modify. It is better to leave > > that > > branch for auto generated content only. That PR template currently > does > > not > > work since it is not on the asf-site (current default) branch. > > 2. It’s confusing for users who go to the site on GitHub or clone the > > repo and expect to see the code they should modify to change the site. > > Instead they have to find the branch that actually has the code that > the > > asf-site build content came from. > > 3. (Minor) PRs default to using the default branch. When filing a PR > for > > the website, GitHub suggests using asf-site first, which gives a > message > > stating that the changes cannot be merged since there is no common > > history. > > > > *Why is our current default asf-site?* > > > > I’m not sure, maybe someone in the community has historical context on > > this. It could be because this is the branch that pre-built docs are > > committed to when we copy them from the main Ozone repo (a practice we > are > > looking to get rid of in the new website). It also seems there were > > some changes > > to branch publishing made around May 2021 > > < > > > https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-asfyaml/blob/main/README.md#publishing-a-branch-to-your-project-web-site > > > > > so perhaps it was required to be this way for publishing before those > > updates. > > > > *Is there any standard among other ASF projects for which branch should > be > > the default?* > > > > I’ve looked at a bunch of other project’s websites and have yet to find > one > > that’s using asf-site as the default. They are all using the development > > branch (equivalent to our master branch) as the default branch. See > > > > - https://github.com/apache/yunikorn-site > > - https://github.com/apache/streampipes-website > > - https://github.com/apache/kvrocks-website > > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site > > - https://github.com/apache/doris-website > > - https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-site > > > > *Will this affect the existing website?* > > > > This should not affect the existing website. The branch to use for > > deployment is hardcoded in .asf.yml > > <https://github.com/apache/ozone-site/blob/asf-site/.asf.yaml> and not > > implied from the repository’s default branch setting. Deployment should > > work as usual. I will double check with infra on the ticket to make sure > no > > changes are required when making this change. > > > > Overall a long winded email for a pretty simple change. I’ll start with > my > > +1 with the hope of incrementally improving the development experience of > > the current site, and in the future, the new website as well. > > > > Ethan > > >
