You raise a really good point, and I agree, clearing out this backlog first could be the right idea. I can start going through them and approving or commenting. This is a huge backlog, but I don't want to leave them out there.
On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 12:12 AM Štefan Miklošovič <[email protected]> wrote: > Big bang or not, there are existing PRs targeting some fixes for docs > (1). I happen to label these PRs like that and just move on. I was > planning to take a holistic look at all of them closer to the release > of 6.0 we are and do it in one merge and be done with it. I prefer to > just accumulate the PRs over time and do it all in bulk. > > I would appreciate it a lot if we deal with these PRs somehow at this > point. I think the authors of these PRs deserve their patches to be > looked at, out of respect for their time and effort. If we do a big > bang then it will be way more difficult to retrofit their patches (or > they will become flat out obsolete / irrelevant if the content > changes). I think it would be better if we do the refactorisation with > their fixes already in so we do not miss them. > > (1) > https://github.com/apache/cassandra/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3Adocs > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2026 at 5:52 PM David Capwell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > For the purpose of producing my own documentation to use as a user, I > took the antlr grammar for Accord CQL and used a model to generate a few > dozen examples of what's possible and not possible in the syntax. I'd love > for something like this to be included in the Accord section. > > > > > > PR open from before I went on leave. Believe all feedback has been > addressed just waiting for approval. Know docs don’t need 2 reviews, just > want to make sure the docs are good for users. > > > > PR is very example focused, shows limitations and work around! > > > > As with the giant over hall. I’m good with the approach. Patric and I > were talking about the doc build process when I first sent out the accord > PR, my hope is the output of this effort makes it easier to contribute / > validate than current trunk > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On Apr 3, 2026, at 2:03 PM, Mick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > >> The phasing in my mind was start with the content and then phase 2, > core build and deployment changes. For the users of Cassandra, my initial > big lift was giving them first class docs(and are they?) > > >> > > >> The items you mentioned are when I start moving things over to trunk, > and yes, there will be a lot of things to get th… > > > > > > > > > > > > My concern here is that you're putting the cart before the horse – you > can't commit any of the new docs until you can build them the way they get > built for the website. So, I guess, you have to be extra clear with folk > that phase 1 is only content and layout review, and that those things may > change and need to be reviewed again after phase 2. when the build is > fixed/adapted. Take for example Scott's mention about rendering latex, > that's moot because it can and will change again. > > > > > > If phase 1 is what you need as the driving force for motivation and to > bring in collaboration, that's fine by me, just so long as everyone > understands the above. > > > >
