at this point do we have to create a new [discuss] thread? I'm still not
familiar with Apache process so I can start a new thread.
I would also add few consideration.
by using branches, let say we create a branch 4.3 for current CS version,
this branch would be the default visible on RTD and we w
On Apr 17, 2014, at 5:57 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> Are you shipping (e.g. making source available for download) tarballs
> or merely producing documentation that we publish publicly.
> If the answer to that is no; then we don't need votes or a formal
> release process (anymore than we need votes
Are you shipping (e.g. making source available for download) tarballs
or merely producing documentation that we publish publicly.
If the answer to that is no; then we don't need votes or a formal
release process (anymore than we need votes for publishing content to
cloudstack.apache.org
--David
O
On Apr 17, 2014, at 5:31 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion wrote:
> Should we have a page on wiki explaining how we would handle release-notes
> on RTD ? and then vote on the method?
> I'm not seeing other alternative to branches exept having one RTD project
> for each release-notes.
>
I think your email he
Should we have a page on wiki explaining how we would handle release-notes
on RTD ? and then vote on the method?
I'm not seeing other alternative to branches exept having one RTD project
for each release-notes.
Pierre-Luc Dion
Architecte de Solution Cloud | Cloud Solutions Architect
855-OK-CLO
So I think it makes sense for most documents to point to feature
version (e.g. 4.3 branch, 4.4 branch.) E.g. docs for 4.3.1 should be
materially the same as 4.3.0 from a docs standpoint. Release notes are
the exception here, though perhaps they could be dealt with in an
additive way.
--David
On T
To add to what Pierre-Luc said:
Readthedocs has something they call "releases" but those are in fact builds
that point to a branch. Not a specific tag.
So the release version of the doc we would see on the website will be the live
state of the release branch, not a tag that we could vote on.
T
makes sense! the only behavior that needs to be taken into account is
that of any publication scripts that we might write. So it seems to me
this is the best result we have from this version of the hackathon :(
& :)
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion wrote:
> At the hackathon of CCC
