I did not mean that any of them are blocking. Keeping two documentation up to date is a growing pain. It's my weakness though that it's still not done. Yet, if you plan to do a bigger reworking, it's better done on the DocBook version.
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 6:58 PM Siegfried Goeschl < siegfried.goes...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Both topics are non-blocking in my opinion > > Regarding documentation: > > A complete Maven website including Markdown content is generated. And > documentation will be updated, extended and moved to Docbook but that can > be done any time - no need to introduce additional dependencies > > Regarding backward compatibility: > > * The code is mostly written by one person and that's me - so it is not a > mature code base > * There are hardly any users out there and new user will detect bugs, > suggest improvements or will tell you that some parts are simply broken by > design - enforcing backward compatibility will do some harm here > * I consider backward compatibility important assuming that you HAVE many > users out there > * It is a command-line tools mostly used by developers and they know what > a 0.x release means - some things are in motion and need time to settle > > Thanks in advance, > > Siegfried Goeschl > > > > > On 24.10.2021, at 15:16, Daniel Dekany <daniel.dek...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 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 > > -- Best regards, Daniel Dekany
