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 >> > >>>> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >>
