+1 from me. — Sent from Mailbox On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Rafael Benevides <benevi...@redhat.com> wrote:
> I ran the PoC and I do really thing that it works for DeltaSpike > (considering that there's no restriction on CMS). > Can I give a green sign to Michelle start the docs refactoring (as > planned) using Asciidoctor? I think that she and her team can work on > its own repository and them move it in one big shot once that we have > all requirements setup. Wdyt ? > Em 8/11/14, 8:17, John D. Ament escreveu: >> @mark >> >> That's what I based it on actually. >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: >> >>> You can look at batchee. >>> >>> Romain configured offline doc (with markdown, but could also be asciidoc) >>> and mvn scm-publish >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> On Sat, 9/8/14, John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Subject: Re: DeltaSpike docs plan >>> To: "deltaspike" <dev@deltaspike.apache.org> >>> Date: Saturday, 9 August, 2014, 15:54 >>> >>> Actually, from digging >>> around their code, might have an easier solution, so >>> long as everyone agrees. >>> >>> I have a small POC setup here: >>> >>> https://github.com/johnament/deltaspike/commit/402becc0e450e551570107a1661d39e9eb6a43cb >>> >>> I setup a local VM w/ a SVN >>> repo to test it out. Basically, we can >>> generate the asciidoc locally using mvn site, >>> then run mvn site-deploy to >>> move the >>> rendered files to staging. Once done, login to CMS and >>> promote to >>> prod. >>> >>> The only change would be to get infra to switch >>> our script to use the shell >>> option. It >>> does put the rendering process on whoever is writing the >>> docs, >>> but since it's using the java >>> plugin and jruby, nothing should need to be >>> downloaded separately to machines. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 1:55 >>> PM, Rafael Benevides <benevi...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > I >>> remember that someone said that CMS already supports >>> remote >>> > repositories. Can't we start >>> by having this documents moved soon while we >>> > discuss about the asciidoc rendering ? >>> > >>> > Em 8/8/14, 10:53, >>> Gerhard Petracek escreveu: >>> > >>> > @john: >>> >> the >>> infra team is usually not the blocking part (if there is >>> no >>> >> significant >>> >> technical issue and they don't get >>> a new heavy part to maintain). >>> >> >>> >> regards, >>> >> >>> gerhard >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> 2014-08-08 >>> 15:37 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com>: >>> >> >>> >> I think we >>> need to convince infra@ that these are all must needed >>> >>> features. >>> >>> From looking at the >>> code behind CMS, it would appear that it's the one >>> >>> calling markdown based on the >>> imports in our files. Unless we want to do >>> >>> something crazy like render >>> asciidoc in markdown format, then hand that >>> >>> over for rendering.. >>> >>> >>> >>> Still >>> would need to convince that pulling from git over the svn >>> site is >>> >>> ideal as well. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On >>> Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Rafael Benevides <benevi...@redhat.com> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Em >>> 8/8/14, 6:49, Pete Muir escreveu: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On 7 Aug 2014, at >>> 18:47, Rafael Benevides <benevi...@redhat.com> >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>>> Before we >>> have a deal with Michelle's team about these content >>> >>>>> changes, >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>> I think we should >>> close the two other definitions: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> - docs location: move >>> to deltaspike sources, create a new repository, >>> >>>>>> other? >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> +1 to move to >>> sources >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> +1 to move to sources >>> >>>> >>> >>>> and >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>> -docs format: markdown >>> or asciidoc >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> +1 for asciidoc. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> +1 for asciidoc >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> However I believe we also >>> need agree on: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> * add support for asciidoc >>> to Apache CMS >>> >>>>> * add >>> support for importing external repo to Apache CMS >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> so that the docs can still >>> be build as part of the website. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> From what >>> people have said in the past, both are possible, if >>> someone >>> >>>>> (e.g. Rafael >>> ;-) can spend a couple of days doing it. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Definitely I would like >>> to help/handle that. I believe that both >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> (asciidoc >>> >>> >>> >>>> support + importing external >>> repo) will bring open doors to >>> >>>> documentation >>> >>>> contribution. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I believe that we should >>> propose a vote to decided this, otherwise it >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>> can become an endless >>> discussion. Wdyt ? >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Em 8/4/14, 17:28, >>> Gerhard Petracek escreveu: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> @suggested content >>> changes: >>> >>>>>>> +1 >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> regards, >>> >>>>>>> gerhard >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> 2014-08-01 18:46 >>> GMT+02:00 Rafael Benevides <benevi...@redhat.com >>> >>>>>>> <mailto:benevi...@redhat.com>>: >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> As you may >>> known, Red Hat docs team was called to help on >>> >>>>>>> DeltaSpike >>> docs. After a long period, they have analyzed the >>> >>>>>>> >>> documentation and bring us an awesome plan that is >>> available >>> >>>>>>> >>> here: >>> >>>>>>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/186f_ >>> >>>>>>> >>> amQ9XuREq8FcO7orxvOjQZtvEEYa7WPj1e8p8bM/edit#heading=h.4sqhyz68wgg2 >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> The >>> document is opened for comments. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Something >>> that was also discussed not only inside Red Hat but >>> >>>>>>> with >>> >>>>>>> some >>> community members is about the format and source of the >>> >>>>>>> >>> documentation. I strongly believe that we should have the >>> >>>>>>> >>> documentation somewhere else but the DS site source. It >>> could >>> >>>>>>> >>> improve the ease to the community to contribute with it. >>> Having >>> >>>>>>> >>> said that, it's also suggested that we should use >>> asciidoc as >>> >>>>>>> >>> documentation format. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> So what we >>> have until now ? >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> - The >>> documentation plan to be reviewed and approved by the DS >>> >>>>>>> community. >>> Then we can talk about the plans to make it happen. >>> >>>>>>> - The >>> documentation location: Recommendation to be out of the >>> >>>>>>> site >>> >>>>>>> source. >>> >>>>>>> - The >>> documentation format: Suggested to use asciidoc. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Please, >>> read the plan and lets discuss about these 3 topics >>> >>>>>>> >>> individually. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Michelle >>> Murray (whose team provided the plan and she is copied >>> >>>>>>> on >>> >>>>>>> this >>> Thread) can follow the feedback. >>> >>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>> *Rafael >>> Benevides | Senior Software Engineer* >>> >>>>>>> JBoss >>> Developer >>> >>>>>>> >>> M: +55-61-9269-6576 <tel:%2B55-61-9269-6576> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Red Hat >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Better >>> technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community >>> >>>>>>> >>> collaboration. >>> >>>>>>> See how it >>> works at www.redhat.com <http://www.redhat.com/> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> LinkedIn >>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/3258288> >>> Youtube >>> >>>>>>> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/redhatlatam> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> > >>> >>>
