Thanks for your feedback! @Yu
Thanks for sharing the previous thread. I looped in @michaeljmarshall here. @Jun It's possible but causes a new shortcoming: Now you should tell the contributor that the versioned docs are different from the NEXT version docs, lol. If our developers don't complain about these separated sources. Like @Asaf comment: > We can take, let's say, five features and see if they were actually done in > the same PR or separate PR. I guess that most documentation is actually > updated separately. Thus, from that perspective, maybe it’s not a con. Then we can do this refactor thoroughgoing. Also, if we keep, somehow several sources in the main repo. We still have shortcomings: 1. Duplicated CI workflows. 2. Cumbersome preview scaffolding in the main repo. ... which is the original purpose I'd like to overcome. Best, tison. Jun Ma <momoma...@hotmail.com> 于2022年12月21日周三 11:19写道： > Is it possible to come up with a compromised solution that has the pros of > both sides but minimizes the side effect? I'm thinking maybe it's not > necessary to sacrifice the current contribution process, as long as it can > greatly reduce the load of back-end actions and source size. For example, > if we only move out the versioned docs to the site repo but keep the source > of the NEXT docs in the pulsar repo, does this help to win a large > proportion of those pros when people can still contribute as usual? > > ________________________________ > From: Jiaqi Shen <gleiphir2...@gmail.com> > Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 17:15 > To: dev@pulsar.apache.org <dev@pulsar.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Website precommit and move the source of docs to > the site repo > > +1, it makes sense to me. > > Thanks, > Jiaqi Shen > > > Yu <li...@apache.org> 于2022年12月19日周一 20:57写道： > > > Hi tison, > > > > Thanks for raising this up! > > > > Our community had a similar discussion previously and chose to "keep" the > > doc repo stay in the Pulsar main repo at that time. > > > > [1] lists the pros and cons of "keep" and "not keep" solutions. > > > > I'm +0 on this proposal because I think the total scores of these two > > solutions are almost equal after weighing the pros and cons. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/mf2xwntfgn84dq78ksqv22jk3drq6xb3 > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 5:40 PM tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for your feedback! > > > > > > @Asaf > > > > > > > pre-commit > > > > > > I mean CI checks before merging a patch. Currently, we don't run checks > > for > > > the content before merging them. This causes a series of syntax errors > > and > > > broken links issues. If we hold docs under site2 folder in the main > repo > > > and then copied to the site repo, we have two places to build such CI > > > checks. What's worse, the checks for the main repo will be quite > > > cumbersome (that you do some if-else logic in the whole Pulsar CI > > > workflows, and do the sync sequentially in that workflow). > > > > > > If we hold the source of docs only in the site repo, we can extend the > > > "precommit" workflow[1] I added recently to check for syntax errors and > > > broken links also. > > > > > > > What does the apache/pulsar-site repo contain today? > > > > > > It should be covered by the documentation guide page[2]. It holds the > > > source of the official website and the user docs are synced from the > main > > > repo. > > > > > > > What content do we have today in the pulsar repo related to the site? > > > > > > After issue-18014[3] is done, we host only user docs and some JSON > > metadata > > > in the main repo, which is synced by site_syncer.py[4]. > > > > > > > Can you explain that better? Are you saying pulsar source JARs > contain > > > the documentation? > > > > > > No. Source JARs contain only the Java files and necessary copyrights > > info. > > > The source release is, for example, > > > > > > > > > https://archive.apache.org/dist/pulsar/pulsar-2.10.2/apache-pulsar-2.10.2-src.tar.gz > > > , > > > which is extracted to 173M where 129M is occupied by the site2 folder. > > > > > > This also affects when developers do git clone to clone the repo. > > > > > > > I mean, if you wish to document a bug fix in 2.9.x, for example, > would > > > you do it in the 2.9.x branch under site2/docs or > > > site2/website/versioned_docs/2.9.5? > > > > > > This is another question. Ideally, we should have hosted versioned docs > > > associated with the specific version to that branch, like Apache Flink > > does > > > as I mentioned[5]. But we do not, and actually the situation is we > update > > > the versioned docs under the master branch and thus, the docs can be > > synced > > > properly. > > > > > > See also the "Alternatives" section in the original email. > > > > > > @All > > > > > > Since we don't have objections to the possible cons listed above or any > > new > > > ones, I'm going to create a tracking issue later this week and show > what > > > will be changed in PRs for further review. > > > > > > Best, > > > tison. > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/blob/f7abc615d57d9846ed093922d24bff952dc0e838/.github/workflows/ci-precommit.yml > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/document-contribution/#source-repositories > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/18014 > > > [4] > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/blob/f7abc615d57d9846ed093922d24bff952dc0e838/tools/pytools/lib/execute/site_syncer.py > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/flink/tree/master/docs > > > > > > > > > PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> 于2022年12月19日周一 16:26写道： > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > I support moving them to the website repo. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Penghui > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 12:04 PM Yunze Xu > <y...@streamnative.io.invalid > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1. The most significant point to me is that we can preview all the > > > > > content of the website without synchronizing contents from the > > > > > apache/pulsar repo. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Yunze > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:53 AM Li Li <urf...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > +1, That’s a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 16, 2022, at 07:07, tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After several works around the build flow of our official > > > > > website[1][2][3], > > > > > > > the content sync and site build flow is debuggable and > > reproducible > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, compared to other Apache projects' websites' project > > > layouts > > > > > and > > > > > > > workflow, we still meet two challenges on the Pulsar site: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. We don't have a pre-commit workflow for any website-related > > > > changes. > > > > > > > Thus, we don't detect broken links or syntax errors when > > reviewing > > > > new > > > > > > > patches[4][5][6]. > > > > > > > 2. The website's content is two-level down in > > `site2/website-next` > > > > for > > > > > > > historical reasons, which is confusing for contributors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To overcome these two shortcomings, I propose the following: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Move the website's content to the root level, then we have a > > > > > first-class > > > > > > > Docu&yarn-based JS project layout. It's more convenient and > > > familiar > > > > to > > > > > > > related developers. > > > > > > > 2. Host the source of docs in the site repo > (apache/pulsar-site) > > > > > instead of > > > > > > > under `site2` folder in the main repo and do content sync. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Below are the pros and cons: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pros > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Obviously, we have the pre-commit workflow now. And since we > > > host > > > > > the > > > > > > > source of docs in one repo, we don't have to run the pre-commit > > > > > workflow in > > > > > > > two places, which can be quite cumbersome to implement. > > > > > > > 2. The size of the source release of the main repo can be > > reduced a > > > > > lot. > > > > > > > Currently, 63MB out of 140MB of the sources are taken by the > > site2 > > > > > folder, > > > > > > > which we can remove totally. In addition, we carry out > > > full-versioned > > > > > docs > > > > > > > every release. > > > > > > > 3. We can clean up a large portion of "integration" to debug > the > > > site > > > > > > > brittlely on the main repo[7] (etc.) and redundant > contribution > > > > > guide[8]. > > > > > > > This way, when updating docs, we can preview the result in one > > repo > > > > > instead > > > > > > > of actually doing the sync on the fly. In addition, this > > > integration > > > > > blocks > > > > > > > we move the website content to the top level since it makes > > strong > > > > > > > assumptions about the relative layout. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cons > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The most significant con is that we cannot update the code and > > docs > > > > in > > > > > one > > > > > > > patch against apache/pulsar now. You must open a new pull > request > > > to > > > > > > > apache/pulsar-site, cross-reference each other and manage the > > merge > > > > > order > > > > > > > (synchronization). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To resolve the versioned docs issue, an alternative is to host > > only > > > > the > > > > > > > user docs along with each version, like Flink does[9]. But it > > both > > > > > detaches > > > > > > > from the Docu framework and requires significant development > > > efforts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since it can explicitly change the development flow (that is, > you > > > > > should > > > > > > > now update docs separately), I am starting this discussion here > > to > > > > > reach > > > > > > > for your feedback. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome to leave your comments! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > tison. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://pulsar.apache.org/ > > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site > > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/18014 > > > > > > > [4] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/17599 > > > > > > > [5] > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17863#discussion_r990174850 > > > > > > > [6] > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17853#discussion_r991803704 > > > > > > > [7] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/b1f9e351fa4d5aba197d33cfc0c536516b55b61f/site2/website/start.sh > > > > > > > [8] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/document-preview/#preview-documentation-changes > > > > > > > [9] https://github.com/apache/flink/tree/master/docs > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
