Yeah, I'm with you there. Content for developers should live where developers are most likely to read it, and I don't think the wiki should be in lieu of the READMEs.
I'm not a fan of trying to host any sort of documentation geared toward a single audience in more than one place (e.g., a README *and* a Geode Wiki page). The wiki is great for other Geode content (how-to articles, community process stuff, things that don't have an obvious home elsewhere), but perhaps actual feature documentation should live exclusively in the READMEs (until it's on develop/scheduled for release, at which time it should also be documented in the user guide). On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 5:30 PM John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote: > And by Wiki, I mean GitHub's Wiki associated with the (source code) > Repository. Between GitHub Wiki and README, README wins every time for > reason previously mentioned. > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 5:28 PM, John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > Personally, as a engineer, I am more of a fan of the GitHub README (or > > even Wiki), rather than a separate site. A lot easier for users to > update > > (submit a PR). > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Kirk Lund <kirk.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> On Thursday, September 22, 2016, Joey McAllister < > jmcallis...@pivotal.io> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > If it isn't on develop or planned for release, then I vote for > removing > >> it > >> > from the user guide altogether. I like the recommendation to keep this > >> and > >> > similar (non-develop branch) information on the wiki, so the community > >> can > >> > still easily access it. > >> > > >> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:51 PM Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org > >> <javascript:;>> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > JVSD isn't labeled as Experimental because it isn't even on develop > >> or in > >> > > part of any Geode release candidate. As far as I know, it exists > only > >> on > >> > an > >> > > incomplete and out-of-date feature branch. Hence, my vote is to > remove > >> > any > >> > > mention of it from the docs until it merges to develop or at a > minimum > >> > gets > >> > > updated (rebased) from develop (or M3). > >> > > > >> > > Has anyone done any rebasing or other work on the JVSD branch that > I'm > >> > not > >> > > aware of? > >> > > > >> > > -Kirk > >> > > > >> > > On Thursday, September 22, 2016, Swapnil Bawaskar < > >> sbawas...@pivotal.io > >> > <javascript:;>> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > I would vote for including it as an "experimental" feature. > >> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Dave Barnes <dbar...@pivotal.io > >> > <javascript:;> > >> > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Process for handling Experimental docs is still being hammered > >> out. > >> > > > Common > >> > > > > element among working scenarios is isolation from the body of > the > >> > User > >> > > > > Guide proper, so I'll remove the JVSD component from the User > >> Guide's > >> > > > Tools > >> > > > > and Modules section. > >> > > > > Could go on the Wiki, could go in an appendix. We'll see what > >> > emerges. > >> > > > > Any favorites among the readers of this thread? > >> > > > > Silence = "Docs group gets to pick" > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:37 PM, John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io > >> > <javascript:;> > >> > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Truthfully, I don't think this is any different than API > >> features > >> > > that > >> > > > > have > >> > > > > > been annotated with "@Experimental" (e.g. LucenceService > >> > > > > > <http://geode.incubator.apache.org/releases/latest/ > >> > > > > > > javadoc/com/gemstone/gemfire/cache/lucene/LuceneService.html>). > >> > > > > > I.e. nothing is going to stop a user from trying to use a > >> > > > > > feature/function/tool and searching for relevant information > on > >> how > >> > > to > >> > > > > use > >> > > > > > it if they know it exists, either explicitly or implicitly. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > In fact, I would think it is advantageous if they know it does > >> > exist, > >> > > > > even > >> > > > > > prior to an official release, so that feedback can be > gathered. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > If it is not to be part of the "official" User Guide, perhaps > a > >> > Wiki > >> > > > page > >> > > > > > (other than the specification > >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage. > >> > > > > > action?pageId=61309918&src=contextnavpagetreemode> > >> > > > > > [1]) > >> > > > > > or better yet, a GitHub README page along with the source code > >> if > >> > > users > >> > > > > are > >> > > > > > given access to build and use the tool themselves. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > If part of the "official" User Guide (under tools), then > >> perhaps a > >> > > > > > "Experimental" label. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Food for thought. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > -John > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > [1] > >> > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage. > >> > > > > > action?pageId=61309918&src=contextnavpagetreemode > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Anthony Baker < > >> aba...@pivotal.io > >> > <javascript:;> > >> > > > <javascript:;>> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I think that providing documentation for jvsd before it is > >> > included > >> > > > in > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > source and binary release distributions will only confuse > >> users. > >> > > +1 > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > > > removing. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Anthony > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Sep 22, 2016, at 2:39 PM, Dave Barnes < > >> dbar...@pivotal.io > >> > <javascript:;> > >> > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > JVSD has appeared in the Geode user manual since M2. See > >> > > > > > > > http://geode.docs.pivotal.io/docs/tools_modules/jvsd.html > . > >> > > > > > > > Kirk, are you recommending that we remove this? > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Kirk Lund < > >> kl...@apache.org > >> > <javascript:;> > >> > > > <javascript:;>> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> I would recommend not mentioning jVSD at all in the Geode > >> 1.0 > >> > > > docs. > >> > > > > > > Right > >> > > > > > > >> now it's just a Jira ticket and feature branch. I think > the > >> > docs > >> > > > > > should > >> > > > > > > >> only cover what's in Geode 1.0. > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> If there's some doc or wiki page about proposed future > >> > features > >> > > or > >> > > > > > > features > >> > > > > > > >> currently looking for contributors/developers, then that > >> would > >> > > > > > probably > >> > > > > > > be > >> > > > > > > >> an appropriate place to mention jVSD. > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Thanks, > >> > > > > > > >> Kirk > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> On Thursday, September 22, 2016, Joey McAllister < > >> > > > > > > jmcallis...@pivotal.io <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> > >> > > > > > > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >>> Bumping this. Any thoughts? > >> > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:50 AM Dave Barnes < > >> > > dbar...@pivotal.io <javascript:;> > >> > > > <javascript:;> > >> > > > > > > >>> <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> To what degree should jVSD be mentioned in the docs? > The > >> > > current > >> > > > > > > >> writeup > >> > > > > > > >>> is > >> > > > > > > >>>> essentially "go get it if you want it, but be warned > that > >> > it's > >> > > > not > >> > > > > > > >> fully > >> > > > > > > >>>> baked and we don't support it". > >> > > > > > > >>>> Would that still be the appropriate jVSD policy for > >> 1.0.0? > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Dan Smith < > >> > > dsm...@pivotal.io <javascript:;> > >> > > > <javascript:;> > >> > > > > > > >>> <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't think we should try to include jVSD in 1.0.0 > at > >> > this > >> > > > > point, > >> > > > > > > >>>> because > >> > > > > > > >>>>> it introduces dependencies that might make the 1.0.0 > >> > release > >> > > > more > >> > > > > > > >>>>> complicated such as the MultiAxisChartFX dependency. > >> But I > >> > > > think > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > >>>> should > >> > > > > > > >>>>> try to get it to develop sooner rather than later to > >> make > >> > it > >> > > > > easier > >> > > > > > > >> for > >> > > > > > > >>>>> people to get jVSD and play with it. > >> > > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> -Dan > >> > > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > -John > >> > > > > > 503-504-8657 > >> > > > > > john.blum10101 (skype) > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > -John > > 503-504-8657 > > john.blum10101 (skype) > > > > > > -- > -John > 503-504-8657 > john.blum10101 (skype) >
