+1 best, Alex
On Aug 24, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Kathleen Ting <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks all for the feedback. > > Unless there is a strong objection against RST, given its ease-of-use, > let's implement the documentation format for Sqoop2 on RST. > > Regards, Kathleen > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Arvind Prabhakar <[email protected]> wrote: >> Apologies for jumping in late on this thread. My personal preference is to >> use RST, even though I have used xdoc in the past and will be happy to go >> with it if that is what gets the most support. >> >> Regards, >> Arvind Prabhakar >> >> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 1:36 AM, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Just note maven xdoc has more features :-). >>> For screenshot/images you don't have any way to specify width or >>> height with apt whereas it's possible with xdoc. >>> >>> IMHO It depends on doc use case. And with maven it's possible to mix >>> apt and xdoc. >>> >>> 2012/6/22 Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[email protected]>: >>>> Hi Kate, >>>> please accept my apology for late response. >>>> >>>> I do not have any strong preference to any particular documentation >>> system. I would just prefer to have plain text files rather than more >>> complex structures (like the mentioned XML). >>>> >>>> Jarcec >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:36:44PM -0700, Kathleen Ting wrote: >>>>> Thanks Cheolsoo and Jagat for your feedback. >>>>> >>>>> Jagat, in regards to your question about what was the issue with how the >>>>> Sqoop1 docs were generated: Sqoop1 docs were generated with a native >>>>> tool, AsciiDoc. >>>>> For Sqoop2, we need a document system that does not require the user to >>>>> install a native tool. >>>>> >>>>> Other Sqoop Devs - what's your document system preference? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, Kathleen >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Jagat Singh <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We should avoid xml files at they consume lot of time managing the >>>>>> documents. >>>>>> >>>>>> How about >>>>>> >>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/doxia/references/apt-format.html >>>>>> >>>>>> Hadoop core has moved away from xml docs to maven apt types docs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also what were the issues with old sqoop1 docs , those were text >>> based and >>>>>> managing those files was easy thing i guess. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 21-Jun-2012 5:01 AM, "Cheolsoo Park" <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 for RST. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't enjoy editing xml files. But if xdoc provides >>>>>>> better integration with maven, I wouldn't mind using it either. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheolsoo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Kathleen Ting <[email protected] >>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Sqoop Devs - >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In regards to implementing a documentation system for Sqoop2 ( >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-492), I am leaning >>> towards >>>>>>>> either RST (http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html) or xdoc ( >>>>>>>> maven.apache.org/doxia/references/xdoc-format.html). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Do you have a preference between RST or xdoc? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Or feel free to propose another documentation format for >>> consideration. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Kathleen >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Olivier Lamy >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >>> -- Alexander Alten-Lorenz http://mapredit.blogspot.com German Hadoop LinkedIn Group: http://goo.gl/N8pCF
