Yes, I guess we can get away with the Maven generated site, if the standard ASF footer and that conference ad thingy can be added. It would be more rational to push through with the conversion to DocBook though. The main cause of the slowdown is that I had this idea that we actually run everything that we show, and never copy-paste sources and output. That was proven to be tricky in many cases, and is still unsolved in some (like where the example uses Linux shell features). I should just let that go for now and push through with the conversion with copy-pasting where we still have problems. On that note, I wonder if you want to rework the content anyway, like we want to move most examples outside the documentation, and then people can open them in IDE, modify them to play around, etc. If you do such reworking, or any serious reworking really, that should be already done in DocBook.
The warning about no backward compatibility needs to be apparent from whatever documentation we release (the DocBook version has it). Backward compatibility is really the main pain with the release. As we promise not backward compatibility, we basically release software without promising later support. People can still decide to use it (or they just don't realize what this means). But, you may feel pressure to keep backward compatibility instead of doing the right thing, which at this stage is maybe not wise. (Also no support can be tricky when there's a security issue with an old release. Although that's probably less relevant for a tool like this.) On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 1:02 PM Siegfried Goeschl < siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > There is still the Maven-based site which can be created using > > > mvn clean site site:stage > > I will look into the source release packages ... > > Thanks in advance, > > Siegfried Goeschl > > > > On 24.10.2021, at 11:38, Daniel Dekany <daniel.dek...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Still no site for example. Note sure about the others, had to review last > > time's list. > > > > Can we build a source release package with all the necessary > > NOTICE-s/LICENSE-s and signing? For this kind of project we will also > want > > a binary release package. > > > > On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 6:59 PM Siegfried Goeschl < > > siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> What stops us from having the first release? Any blockers we are aware > of? > >> > >> Thanks in advance, > >> > >> Siegfried Goeschl > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Daniel Dekany > > -- Best regards, Daniel Dekany
