+1
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Sriram Subramanian
wrote:
> I actually think it is a pretty good idea to have the docs in git.
> Summarizing the benefits -
>
> 1. If a contributor/committer makes any significant changes to how a
> functionality works, they could always update the docs in par
I actually think it is a pretty good idea to have the docs in git.
Summarizing the benefits -
1. If a contributor/committer makes any significant changes to how a
functionality works, they could always update the docs in parallel and
reviewers can enforce this if they find the change deems a docum
With two patches, we'll need a two-phase commit to maintain
consistency, and we all know what a PITA this can be.
(Sorry, couldn't resist the pun. Carry on.)
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Jay Kreps wrote:
> That makes sense. I agree that moving to another doc system isn't a high
> priority (i
That makes sense. I agree that moving to another doc system isn't a high
priority (it isn't as much work as it sounds because the HTML can all
remain as is, just the includes would get converted). But actually I don't
think that having a patch for docs and a patch for the code is too big a
hurdle e
I like how we have things in SVN. My issue is having two patches from
contributors (one for tests + code and another for docs) that I am trying
to solve.
If we copy the entire SVN docs directory into git under /docs then
contributions can patch the docs in their git patch. Committers can do 1
com
Currently we are handling the versioning problem by explicitly versioning
docs that change over time (configuration, quickstart, design, etc). This
is done by just creating a copy of these pages for each release in a
subdirectory. So we can commit documentation changes at any time for the
future re
I would strongly support this idea. We have similar model in all other projects
where I’m involved:
The docs are part of the usual code base and we do require contributors to
update them when they are adding a new feature. And then during release time we
simply take snapshot of the docs and upl
Hey Joe,
I'd love to encourage documentation contributions.
I think we do have a way to contribute to docs. The current workflow for
contributing is
1. Checkout the docs
2. Change docs
3. Submit patch in normal way
4. Committer reviews and applies
For committers we have traditionally made the re
