RE: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation
My intention is to link it to the website, so we have browsable documentation > Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 19:26:23 -0800 > From: currens.ch...@gmail.com > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation > > I don't understand why we have the rendered html in the docs. I don't mind > having the .chm rendered and put in the repo, but the entire HTML > documentation spans 8,000 files and over 100mb. The CHM comes in at around > 15mb. > > I don't think it's necessary to have both in the repo, but if the consensus > is to keep them both, I think we should bundle the HTML docs in a zip, > instead of being added as loose files, at least in trunk. I think it's > kinda silly the way it is now, and SVN does better at handling 1 large file > versus 8,000 smaller ones. > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Michael Herndon > wrote: > > > @Stefan. > > > > I wouldn't worry about the taking the blame, you've done plenty to help out > > and there is no way to catch everything. We'll learn as we go. > > > > As svnpub is the only option and since we can't run the binary version that > > uses ASP.NET, we'll need to probably take your suggestion commit the > > smaller chunks of html then. > > > > I'll do it manually this time and see if I can't write a script that > > automates it in the future. > > > > @Chris, thanks for the fixes to the build scripts this weekend. > > > > - Michael > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > > > > On 2011-11-07, Michael Herndon wrote: > > > > > > > I can rebuild it, but the trick is replacing the version of it in svn > > so > > > > that it does not cause svnsync and cms to choke. Last time I just > > pushed > > > it > > > > into branch/site/docs. However, that is not publicly visible for the > > > > incubation website, so Prescott had to do an svn move. > > > > > > When I recommended to do the svn move I didn't realize we were talking > > > about that many files. I simply didn't check, sorry. > > > > > > > I'm not quite sure how to go about it this time around. I would push it > > > to > > > > jira, but it caps uploads at 10 mb. > > > > > > Then it still had to go to svn in some way. > > > > > > Personally I'm not a friend of generated documents in svn but I'm in a > > > minority here. > > > > > > With svnpubsub being your only option I think the only thing you can do > > > is split the commit into smaller chunks, committing 100 or 200 files at > > > a time. Maybe infra has better ideas than that, I don't. > > > > > > Stefan > > > > >
Re: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation
I don't understand why we have the rendered html in the docs. I don't mind having the .chm rendered and put in the repo, but the entire HTML documentation spans 8,000 files and over 100mb. The CHM comes in at around 15mb. I don't think it's necessary to have both in the repo, but if the consensus is to keep them both, I think we should bundle the HTML docs in a zip, instead of being added as loose files, at least in trunk. I think it's kinda silly the way it is now, and SVN does better at handling 1 large file versus 8,000 smaller ones. On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Michael Herndon wrote: > @Stefan. > > I wouldn't worry about the taking the blame, you've done plenty to help out > and there is no way to catch everything. We'll learn as we go. > > As svnpub is the only option and since we can't run the binary version that > uses ASP.NET, we'll need to probably take your suggestion commit the > smaller chunks of html then. > > I'll do it manually this time and see if I can't write a script that > automates it in the future. > > @Chris, thanks for the fixes to the build scripts this weekend. > > - Michael > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > > On 2011-11-07, Michael Herndon wrote: > > > > > I can rebuild it, but the trick is replacing the version of it in svn > so > > > that it does not cause svnsync and cms to choke. Last time I just > pushed > > it > > > into branch/site/docs. However, that is not publicly visible for the > > > incubation website, so Prescott had to do an svn move. > > > > When I recommended to do the svn move I didn't realize we were talking > > about that many files. I simply didn't check, sorry. > > > > > I'm not quite sure how to go about it this time around. I would push it > > to > > > jira, but it caps uploads at 10 mb. > > > > Then it still had to go to svn in some way. > > > > Personally I'm not a friend of generated documents in svn but I'm in a > > minority here. > > > > With svnpubsub being your only option I think the only thing you can do > > is split the commit into smaller chunks, committing 100 or 200 files at > > a time. Maybe infra has better ideas than that, I don't. > > > > Stefan > > >
Re: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation
On 2011-11-07, Michael Herndon wrote: > I can rebuild it, but the trick is replacing the version of it in svn so > that it does not cause svnsync and cms to choke. Last time I just pushed it > into branch/site/docs. However, that is not publicly visible for the > incubation website, so Prescott had to do an svn move. When I recommended to do the svn move I didn't realize we were talking about that many files. I simply didn't check, sorry. > I'm not quite sure how to go about it this time around. I would push it to > jira, but it caps uploads at 10 mb. Then it still had to go to svn in some way. Personally I'm not a friend of generated documents in svn but I'm in a minority here. With svnpubsub being your only option I think the only thing you can do is split the commit into smaller chunks, committing 100 or 200 files at a time. Maybe infra has better ideas than that, I don't. Stefan
Re: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation
I can rebuild it, but the trick is replacing the version of it in svn so that it does not cause svnsync and cms to choke. Last time I just pushed it into branch/site/docs. However, that is not publicly visible for the incubation website, so Prescott had to do an svn move. I'm not quite sure how to go about it this time around. I would push it to jira, but it caps uploads at 10 mb. And I definitely don't want to cause infra any grief. Thoughts/Suggestions on how to proceed ? On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Christopher Currens wrote: > I've committed the changes to the xml documentation to the repo. > > I built the documentation, but I wasn't sure how Michael packaged the > documentation in [LUCENENET-452]. If someone could either rebuild the > documentation or let me know how it was done for the release, then we can > open it up for another vote to release it. > > > Thanks, > Christopher > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Prescott Nasser >wrote: > > > I dont mind > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > > > From: Christopher Currens > > Sent: 11/4/2011 5:08 PM > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation > > > > A few days ago, after RC1 was put up for a vote to release, I started > > working on [LUCENENET-438] by cleaning up the documentation. The current > > state of the documentation is pretty bad, there are many unconverted > > remnants of javadoc comments (ie, @link, @see, etc..). I wanted to do > this > > simply to get our documentation up to a more readable level. > > > > I had expected this to take quite a long time, but with the magic of > > regular expressions and find and replace, I'm nearly done with the > > conversion, this all on the heels of the RC2 that was just put up to > vote. > > I will probably wind up finishing the cleanup of the documentation > > comments before Monday. I would have said something earlier had I known > it > > wouldn't take me long and I likely wouldn't have made a vote on releasing > > RC2. > > > > So, if no one is opposed to it, we may consider to wait on RC2, > regenerate > > new documentation after I push the changes to SVN, and package it for > > another RC (Sorry, Prescott!!). It might be nice to have those > > documentation issues fixed. Like I said before, I hadn't really expected > > to finish it so quickly, and hadn't even though it could be ready in time > > for 2.9.4 release. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Christopher > > >
Re: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation
I've committed the changes to the xml documentation to the repo. I built the documentation, but I wasn't sure how Michael packaged the documentation in [LUCENENET-452]. If someone could either rebuild the documentation or let me know how it was done for the release, then we can open it up for another vote to release it. Thanks, Christopher On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > I dont mind > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > From: Christopher Currens > Sent: 11/4/2011 5:08 PM > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation > > A few days ago, after RC1 was put up for a vote to release, I started > working on [LUCENENET-438] by cleaning up the documentation. The current > state of the documentation is pretty bad, there are many unconverted > remnants of javadoc comments (ie, @link, @see, etc..). I wanted to do this > simply to get our documentation up to a more readable level. > > I had expected this to take quite a long time, but with the magic of > regular expressions and find and replace, I'm nearly done with the > conversion, this all on the heels of the RC2 that was just put up to vote. > I will probably wind up finishing the cleanup of the documentation > comments before Monday. I would have said something earlier had I known it > wouldn't take me long and I likely wouldn't have made a vote on releasing > RC2. > > So, if no one is opposed to it, we may consider to wait on RC2, regenerate > new documentation after I push the changes to SVN, and package it for > another RC (Sorry, Prescott!!). It might be nice to have those > documentation issues fixed. Like I said before, I hadn't really expected > to finish it so quickly, and hadn't even though it could be ready in time > for 2.9.4 release. > > > Thanks, > Christopher >
RE: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation
I dont mind Sent from my Windows Phone From: Christopher Currens Sent: 11/4/2011 5:08 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation A few days ago, after RC1 was put up for a vote to release, I started working on [LUCENENET-438] by cleaning up the documentation. The current state of the documentation is pretty bad, there are many unconverted remnants of javadoc comments (ie, @link, @see, etc..). I wanted to do this simply to get our documentation up to a more readable level. I had expected this to take quite a long time, but with the magic of regular expressions and find and replace, I'm nearly done with the conversion, this all on the heels of the RC2 that was just put up to vote. I will probably wind up finishing the cleanup of the documentation comments before Monday. I would have said something earlier had I known it wouldn't take me long and I likely wouldn't have made a vote on releasing RC2. So, if no one is opposed to it, we may consider to wait on RC2, regenerate new documentation after I push the changes to SVN, and package it for another RC (Sorry, Prescott!!). It might be nice to have those documentation issues fixed. Like I said before, I hadn't really expected to finish it so quickly, and hadn't even though it could be ready in time for 2.9.4 release. Thanks, Christopher
[Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubator-RC2 Documentation
A few days ago, after RC1 was put up for a vote to release, I started working on [LUCENENET-438] by cleaning up the documentation. The current state of the documentation is pretty bad, there are many unconverted remnants of javadoc comments (ie, @link, @see, etc..). I wanted to do this simply to get our documentation up to a more readable level. I had expected this to take quite a long time, but with the magic of regular expressions and find and replace, I'm nearly done with the conversion, this all on the heels of the RC2 that was just put up to vote. I will probably wind up finishing the cleanup of the documentation comments before Monday. I would have said something earlier had I known it wouldn't take me long and I likely wouldn't have made a vote on releasing RC2. So, if no one is opposed to it, we may consider to wait on RC2, regenerate new documentation after I push the changes to SVN, and package it for another RC (Sorry, Prescott!!). It might be nice to have those documentation issues fixed. Like I said before, I hadn't really expected to finish it so quickly, and hadn't even though it could be ready in time for 2.9.4 release. Thanks, Christopher
