I'm okay with Josh's suggestion of both. Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity. On Apr 5, 2014 10:23 PM, "Christopher" <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Acknowledged. > > I do want to hear from Mike Drob and John Vines first before I take > any further action on this, though. If they're okay with what Sean and > Josh suggested (making the changes to 1.6.0 without removing the > examples), I'll do that. If not, I'll re-apply the commit to 1.7.0 > only. > > Either way, I'll put in a follow-on ticket for auto-generating the > example configs in the build and moving them from conf/ to docs/ in > 1.7.0. I'll still wait for their feedback first, though, so I get the > initial wording of those tickets right. > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You have to think about the impact that you put on people downstream that > > are expecting those files to be in place. Packagers, most notably, would > be > > affected. It's not just that there is an example that someone can > interpret, > > but also automated processes or tutorials/howtos that people have written > > that expect these files to exist. > > > > > > On 4/5/2014 12:57 PM, Christopher wrote: > >> > >> Personally, I think the template serves as a sufficient example, and > >> the generated files after executing the bootstrap_config script should > >> also serve the same purpose, but I can appreciate the lower impact > >> (especially to documentation that may refer to examples) of leaving > >> the examples in place. >
