@Evan: That PR looks fine to me. One thing: Have you submitted an ICLA to Apache? It seems like it would be a good idea to do at some point, as you are likely to continue making not-insignificant changes to this repo.
@Yuri/Others: How do we want to handle PR reviews? I propose doing it the same way as on review-board, of leaving comments on the system as appropriate. Do we want to wait for multiple committers to say LGTM? I propose that at the moment, whilst the documentation repo is being built up, that we just commit the PRs after looking over them for sanity, and then lock it down a bit once stabilized to the current code base? To avoid stalling this progress any longer, I will commit Evans PR within the next 24hrs unless someone says otherwise. Ali On 9 May 2015 at 13:55, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: > For Pull request > > On 9 May 2015 at 17:12, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I believe we should split the docs into: >> >> Documentation => Documents how to build the documentation and how to use >> sphinx + ReST (mostly just an example and to help ease the transition) >> manual => The user manual provided with the client (How to >> make a wave, .....) >> developer => Everything a developer would need, how to start the >> server, how to build, how to contribute >> api => How to build with the gadgets/robot api >> protocol => All about the protocol specifications >> >> after the "Documentation" is built I will submit a pull request to the >> main so you guys can see if you like it. >> >> On 6 May 2015 at 00:41, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >>> >>> The repository is at https://github.com/apache/incubator-wave-docs, >>> and is rather empty at the moment. >>> I see no reason we shouldn't accept pull requests to this repo, so I >>> suggest you use that workflow... >>> >>> Sphinx sounds fine. Many people will be familiar with rest (it shares >>> a lot with markdown but is more powerful) thanks to Python docs making >>> use of it. >>> >>> Can we find any other volunteers for moving the docs out of >>> confluence, as there is quite a lot to do....? >>> >>> Ali >>> >>> On 1 May 2015 at 04:03, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > I think sphinx would be a better option than jekyll for the >>> > documentation, >>> > it does use restructured text instead of markdown but is more >>> > extensible >>> > and can easily produce a pdf format compared to markdown. Gonna spin up >>> > my >>> > own repo and see how it is, been looking at the syntax and it isn't >>> > that >>> > bad. >>> > >>> > On 1 May 2015 at 01:53, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Okay. A new repository has been made: >>> >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-wave-docs.git >>> >> >>> >> I have requested github integration for it, so we can use pull >>> >> requests if we would like to... >>> >> >>> >> Ali >>> >> >>> >> On 29 April 2015 at 00:53, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> > I like the idea of also moving the website off of the cms but not >>> >> > sure if >>> >> > it should be in same repository. Ill look into jekyll for the >>> >> documentation >>> >> > but theres also other build systems which might be better for us aka >>> >> > html >>> >> > and pdf export. >>> >> > >>> >> > Go ahead with the repository for the documentation and well go from >>> >> there. >>> >> > Well need to transfer any issues in jira or deal with them during >>> >> > the >>> >> > transition >>> >> > On 29/04/2015 1:20 AM, "Pablo Ojanguren" <pablo...@gmail.com> >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> >> +1 Moving doc to git would be good, moreover if we update and >>> >> >> improve >>> >> it a >>> >> >> litlle bit along the migration process (at least the organization). >>> >> >> >>> >> >> 2015-04-28 16:40 GMT+02:00 Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk>: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Yuri, >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I think the main reason to move is to make it easier for people >>> >> >> > to >>> >> >> > make changes, over the existing confluence system. So I would >>> >> >> > have >>> >> >> > though that improving the documentation is something people would >>> >> >> > be >>> >> >> > more likely to do afterwards. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I agree that opening some tickets where the documentation could >>> >> >> > be >>> >> >> > improved does help highlight the problem, but it doesn't make it >>> >> >> > any >>> >> >> > easier for people to fix. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > Ali >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > P.s. Do you want me to do anything for RC9, or are you happy to >>> >> >> > submit >>> >> >> > one? Are you waiting on me for anything still? >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > On 28 April 2015 at 15:36, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >> > > Maybe it would be better to move in small steps. Like to go >>> >> >> > > over >>> >> >> current >>> >> >> > > documentation and open tickets with requests for improvements >>> >> wherever >>> >> >> > > something is missing or not clear. >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 5:33 PM Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> >>> >> >> > > wrote: >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > >> Well, doesn't look like anybody else has much opinion. >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> Shall I just raise a ticket for a new repo for this? >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> It probably makes sense to put the whole website under it, >>> >> >> > >> rather >>> >> than >>> >> >> > >> using the combination of Apache CMS website + Confluence that >>> >> >> > >> we do >>> >> >> > >> currently. We could just use Jekyll for both website and docs? >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> Ali >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> On 25 April 2015 at 02:52, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> >>> >> >> > >> wrote: >>> >> >> > >> > indeed and yea without a doubt >>> >> >> > >> > >>> >> >> > >> > On 25 April 2015 at 09:59, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >>> >> >> > >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> Hi Evan, >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> +1 >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> After giving this some more thought post the Hangout, I do >>> >> >> > >> >> think >>> >> >> that >>> >> >> > >> >> moving the docs to Git provides us with a measurable >>> >> >> > >> >> improvement >>> >> >> over >>> >> >> > >> >> the current situation - particularly with the ability to >>> >> >> > >> >> keep >>> >> docs >>> >> >> > >> >> synced with the releases via branches, and the reduced >>> >> >> > >> >> barrier >>> >> to >>> >> >> > >> >> entry for changing them. >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> Would you be interested in leading the migration effort? >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> Ali >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> On 24 April 2015 at 05:59, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > >> >> > woops, my bad >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > This is a proposal for the storage of documentation to be >>> >> moved >>> >> >> to >>> >> >> > a >>> >> >> > >> git >>> >> >> > >> >> > repository instead of on confluence and leave confluence >>> >> >> > >> >> > as a >>> >> >> place >>> >> >> > >> for >>> >> >> > >> >> > other technical documents used by developers. >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > *Confluence:* >>> >> >> > >> >> > *The issues:* >>> >> >> > >> >> > - contributors must ask for permission from the >>> >> mailing >>> >> >> > list >>> >> >> > >> to >>> >> >> > >> >> be >>> >> >> > >> >> > given the privilege settings to edit/create pages >>> >> >> > >> >> > - Simple revision history is kept but is more >>> >> difficult >>> >> >> to >>> >> >> > >> easy >>> >> >> > >> >> > transition documentation between wave release versions, >>> >> >> > >> >> > more >>> >> of a >>> >> >> > >> running >>> >> >> > >> >> > active document >>> >> >> > >> >> > *The good:* >>> >> >> > >> >> > * - *easily able to export to pdf and web formats >>> >> >> > >> >> > - has an easy online rich editor >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > *Git (markdown):* >>> >> >> > >> >> > * The issues:* >>> >> >> > >> >> > * - *setup as a new repository? a folder in >>> >> >> > >> >> > current >>> >> >> > repository? >>> >> >> > >> >> > apache will need to be involved if a new repository is to >>> >> >> > >> >> > be >>> >> >> setup >>> >> >> > >> >> > - exporting the markdown files into a meaningful >>> >> >> > >> representation >>> >> >> > >> >> > (web, pdf), many build systems exist but custom system >>> >> >> > >> >> > can >>> >> also >>> >> >> be >>> >> >> > >> >> written >>> >> >> > >> >> > by our committers >>> >> >> > >> >> > * The good:* >>> >> >> > >> >> > * - *less of a roadblock, allows users to >>> >> >> > >> >> > contribute >>> >> more, >>> >> >> > also >>> >> >> > >> >> > allows new committers a trial at how to add commits using >>> >> >> > >> >> > the >>> >> >> > apache >>> >> >> > >> >> > procedures >>> >> >> > >> >> > - Highly customisable >>> >> >> > >> >> > - Revision history and versions easily achieved >>> >> >> > >> >> > for >>> >> >> example >>> >> >> > >> with >>> >> >> > >> >> > branches (master, 0.4.x, 0.5.x, ....) >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > *TL;DR* >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > Confluence is a rich wiki but can limit the availability >>> >> >> > >> >> > for >>> >> >> > >> committers >>> >> >> > >> >> to >>> >> >> > >> >> > publish updates (need to ask permission, which isn't that >>> >> hard) >>> >> >> and >>> >> >> > >> is a >>> >> >> > >> >> > good place to store technical information for the >>> >> >> > >> >> > project. >>> >> >> > >> >> > A markdown written file structured documentation >>> >> implementation >>> >> >> is >>> >> >> > >> more >>> >> >> > >> >> > accessible to developers, follows a more natural flow and >>> >> >> > >> >> > can >>> >> be >>> >> >> > >> highly >>> >> >> > >> >> > customised and has great revision structure. >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > *Relevant Jira Issues:* >>> >> >> > >> >> > * - none* >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > *Please express your opinions below and if enough >>> >> >> > >> >> > feedback is >>> >> >> > present >>> >> >> > >> a >>> >> >> > >> >> > vote from the mailing list should be called after the >>> >> >> discussion. * >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > On 24 April 2015 at 14:28, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> >> This is a proposal for .... >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> TL;DR >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >
