Thanks, everyone, for the clarifications.
I consolidated the doc donation files under a single directory called
'geode-docs' on branch feature/GEODE-1952.
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Dave Barnes wrote:
> That sounds like the end result I was hoping for.
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:05 AM,
That sounds like the end result I was hoping for.
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
> Sorry, yes, I meant a new geode-docs subdirectory.
>
> -Dan
>
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Anthony Baker wrote:
>
>> Did you mean a new top-level dir (e.g. geode-docs) or a subdir of
>> ge
Sorry, yes, I meant a new geode-docs subdirectory.
-Dan
On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Anthony Baker wrote:
> Did you mean a new top-level dir (e.g. geode-docs) or a subdir of
> geode-core? Since the docs could cover multiple components I’m not sure it
> makes sense to put them under geode-co
Did you mean a new top-level dir (e.g. geode-docs) or a subdir of geode-core?
Since the docs could cover multiple components I’m not sure it makes sense to
put them under geode-core.
Anthony
>
> I think we should just go ahead and create a feature branch off of the the
> current geode develo
Actually, it looks like the staging/docs-grant1 branch has *only* the docs
files, not anything else. If you are seeing directories like geode-core in
your local checkout of the branch, it's probably because you had build
artifacts in those directories and git left the directory around when you
swit
