Do you prefer the website source to live in the ActiveMQ main repo? My existing PR targets the main repo, Matt and I were discussing creating a new PR against the Website repo. I'm fine either way.
Sérgio Em ter., 10 de nov. de 2026 às 06:37, Christopher Shannon < [email protected]> escreveu: > I don't have a strong preference either way, just having a modern > website will be a huge bonus. > > I'm not sure how we are going to fix this (or who) but I've also been > thinking about how bad we have been at documenting recent features. In > short, we haven't. For the last several years we have often ignored > updating the documentation when we add or change features so it's very > out of date. > > After the website is updated it would be good to try and slowly go > back and add updates. I think this would be easier if we adopt JB's > "phase 3" of trying to sync the docs and the code. The only other > thing we could do is make it a point to require documentation updates > along with PRs when necessary. Ie if you add a new policy option, > updating the docs should be part of the PR (which again is easier if > part of the same repo) > > Chris > > > On Wed, Nov 4, 2026 at 11:10 AM Matt Pavlovich via dev > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Sounds good, I’ll work to coordinate with Sergio on moving forward with > the Docusaurus update. > > > > > On Nov 3, 2026, at 10:44 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > I don't have a strong preference between Docusaurus or Jekyll as soon > as the updates/deployments are easy :) > > > > > > NB: karaf.apache.org <http://karaf.apache.org/> has been revamped a > little as well. > > > > > > As said previously, we should stick with the plan: > > > Phase 1: use framework to simplify the update (Docusaurus or Jekyll) > > > Phase 2: update look'n feel to have a more modern flavor > > > Phase 3: work on the documentation/content. About this, I strongly > believe the documentation should move in the code repo to keep it in sync. > For instance, we do that in Polaris or Karaf and it's pretty convenient. > > > > > > Let's focus on Phase 1 & 2 for now. > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2026 at 7:52 PM Matt Pavlovich via dev < > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >> Thanks, Sérgio. > > >> > > >> The other option would be to look at adding some full-text search on > top of the current Jekyll-based website. I do not have a huge preference > either way. > > >> > > >> A couple other projects recently made big refreshes of stack and > theme to include site search: > > >> > > >> https://wicket.apache.org <https://wicket.apache.org/> > > >> https://camel.apache.org <https://camel.apache.org/> > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Matt > > >> > > >> > On Nov 3, 2026, at 12:35 PM, Sérgio Damo de Lemos < > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Hi team, > > >> > > > >> > We have a Docusaurus-based website in > https://activemq-proposal.netlify.app/. > > >> > There were some discussions around which stack to use in > > >> > https://github.com/apache/activemq/issues/2101. Docusaurus has a > > >> > client-side search plugin, which was one of the nice-to-haves. Matt > and I > > >> > discussed we should have some validation that a new website still > respect > > >> > the same URLs as the existing one (so all the links and bookmarks > out there > > >> > still work, same with search engines), yesterday I prototyped an > automatic > > >> > validation, I will update the PR for the Docusarus website before > EOW. > > >> > > > >> > I know there are many static website platforms, I'm ok if the > community > > >> > decides for something else. But the Docusaurus is pretty much done. > > >> > > > >> > Sérgio > > >> > > > >> > Em ter., 3 de nov. de 2026 às 11:25, Matt Pavlovich via dev < > > >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> escreveu: > > >> > > > >> >> As we are starting to keep a cadence going on releases, I thought > it might > > >> >> be good to settle on the website tech stack update. > > >> >> > > >> >> I know Sergio has some working sites out there with updated stacks > and > > >> >> features. > > >> >> > > >> >> Given the good cadence and updates, I think it would make sense to > get the > > >> >> new website tech stack settled, so as we need new documentation on > features > > >> >> and releases we are doing it on the new site, vs having to > continue to pull > > >> >> forward the changes to the website update PRs. > > >> >> > > >> >> Thoughts? > > >> >> > > >> >> -Matt Pavlovich > > >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > > >> >> For further information, visit: > https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > > >> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > >> > > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > >
