You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@lucene.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2020/09/14 12:49:30 UTC
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh opened a new pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
epugh opened a new pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] HoustonPutman edited a comment on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
HoustonPutman edited a comment on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-692138594
Didn't know it was a vote, but I like the result of the new format. Are there other options or is it just autowidth vs. what is already there?
And we should probably look each of the tables after altering them to make sure they still look good, but yeah I think it's a good idea unless Cassandra disagrees. And just start with the ones marked TODO. It'd probably be tedious to go and manually check all of the other tables.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] ctargett commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ctargett commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693403436
bq. Having consistent best practices encoded in the document
The place that codifies our asciidoc best practices is in `meta-docs/asciidoc-syntax.adoc`, which is published with every Ref Guide as part of `how-to-contribute.adoc`. It in fact says to use the `options="header"` syntax for header rows, but to be honest I don't see any problem with someone using any valid syntax that ends up with the same HTML style.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] arafalov commented on a change in pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
arafalov commented on a change in pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#discussion_r488846561
##########
File path: solr/solr-ref-guide/src/other-parsers.adoc
##########
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ Comma separated list of tags for excluding queries from parameters above. See ex
{!bool filter=foo should=bar}
----
-Parameters might also be multivalue references. The former example above is equivlent to
Review comment:
This and next empty space seems not needed. But 'equivlent' spelling could be fixed.
##########
File path: solr/solr-ref-guide/src/performance-statistics-reference.adoc
##########
@@ -191,9 +187,7 @@ You can get the statistics shown in the table below with an API request such as
The following statistics are available for each of the caches mentioned above:
-// TODO: Change column width to %autowidth.spread when https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor-pdf/issues/599 is fixed
-
-[cols="25,75",options="header"]
+[%autowidth.spread,width="100%",options="header"]
Review comment:
This one gets parameter wrapped-up in weird way. I wish there was a way to mark column no-wrap specifically for this one. But it is ok otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh edited a comment on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh edited a comment on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693365546
Thanks for the sleuthing @ctargett, I never thought about the case of no command. I tested it this morning, and you are correct.
So, I think one pattern or the other for tables headings might be the way to go. I know that I learn by looking at other examples in the ref guide, so if I see other tables using the options="header", then I'll do the same. Likewise if I looked instead at the example in `aliases.adoc` first.
I updated `the-standard-query-parser.adoc` to remove the autowidth.spread, and I think it is cleaner and easier to read...
Does this sound like the right approach?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] ctargett commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ctargett commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-696366569
I'm a little confused what's going on here at this point. It seems the latest commits increase the mixing of styles, which as I said is fine with me in general, but sort of counter to what you said you wanted to do.
There are 3 tables in `charfilterfactories.adoc` for example, and two are now changed to remove the `[options="header"]` and add a blank line between header row and data rows, but the header param remains on the 3rd table which also includes the `%autowidth.spread,width="100%"` parameters which I thought I showed aren't necessary and are already the default.
Despite all that, the `asciidoc-syntax.adoc` is updated to imply the best practice is defining the autospread, width, and header params explicitly, even though other tables in this PR were changed to definitely not do that. It stops short of saying it's a best practice, though, it just points out that one might see it (when before it was more direct in what it recommended writers to do).
So, I'm no longer sure what's really being achieved here. Removing TODOs that aren't needed anymore because they're holdovers from PDF days is a laudable goal and helpful cleanup, but is it any more clear now what both the internal docs and examples within the content would recommend someone do to define tables? I know that wasn't the original intent, but it got turned into a goal and now it's not doing that. At this point I'm not sure if I should approve the PR (since I don't think it's ultimately that big a deal) or if I should look to hold the PR to some level of internal consistency?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693410287
Thanks for pointing that out. So, should we change it up in the asciidoc-syntax.adoc to remove the options="header", and then start progressivley going with the simpler style? I like how the simpler style removes a lot of thinking, and maybe we highlight to only use the more complex style when you need "specific control over the column width in tables". There are a couple of places where the autowidth doesnt' look good, places where, if we had a nowrap type setting we would use that in conjuction with autowidth.
Again, happy to do the leg work, I know it grows the scope of this PR beyond removing those TODO's to revamping all tables.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] ctargett commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ctargett commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-696366569
I'm a little confused what's going on here at this point. It seems the latest commits increase the mixing of styles, which as I said is fine with me in general, but sort of counter to what you said you wanted to do.
There are 3 tables in `charfilterfactories.adoc` for example, and two are now changed to remove the `[options="header"]` and add a blank line between header row and data rows, but the header param remains on the 3rd table which also includes the `%autowidth.spread,width="100%"` parameters which I thought I showed aren't necessary and are already the default.
Despite all that, the `asciidoc-syntax.adoc` is updated to imply the best practice is defining the autospread, width, and header params explicitly, even though other tables in this PR were changed to definitely not do that. It stops short of saying it's a best practice, though, it just points out that one might see it (when before it was more direct in what it recommended writers to do).
So, I'm no longer sure what's really being achieved here. Removing TODOs that aren't needed anymore because they're holdovers from PDF days is a laudable goal and helpful cleanup, but is it any more clear now what both the internal docs and examples within the content would recommend someone do to define tables? I know that wasn't the original intent, but it got turned into a goal and now it's not doing that. At this point I'm not sure if I should approve the PR (since I don't think it's ultimately that big a deal) or if I should look to hold the PR to some level of internal consistency?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-692161395
You may not know this, but the original norse meaning of "Eric" (or as some people like to misspell it, "Erick") is "Likes to refactor the most tedious open source code". ;-)
I'll start with the TODO's, and glad you like the edit. Doesn't appear to be a global style approach that would work.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] HoustonPutman commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
HoustonPutman commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-692077297
Built the site and compared it to what's currently published, and the table looks better to me!
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh closed pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh closed pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on a change in pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on a change in pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#discussion_r488942550
##########
File path: solr/solr-ref-guide/src/other-parsers.adoc
##########
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ Comma separated list of tags for excluding queries from parameters above. See ex
{!bool filter=foo should=bar}
----
-Parameters might also be multivalue references. The former example above is equivlent to
Review comment:
okay, fixed the typo, but left spacing to match the other spacing.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] ctargett edited a comment on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ctargett edited a comment on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693000958
So, the changes look fine enough to me, but I don't think they're actually needed.
The `%autowidth.spread` works by setting a `spread` class on the `<table>` element. This is the default, though, so it's set even without defining that attribute. The way it has been with `cols="30,70"`, or whatever it was for each table, overrode that by setting the `<colgroup>` element on each table to set the width of each column.
I suspect if you just remove the `cols` parameter and TODO note, the table will look pretty close the way it does with the new `autospread` attribute.
I figured this out by inspecting the HTML for tables that had been created after the conversion from Confluence (when these TODOs were introduced), such as the one on `aliases.adoc`, which don't have the TODO. I noticed that it gets `<table class="spread">` (plus some other classes) and the `<colgroup>` is set to an equal % for each column. Which is basically which happens with the change here.
It's also possible to avoid setting an explicit `options="header"` if all tables include an empty line between the first row and the subsequent rows. I'll leave that up to individual preference, though - the table in `aliases.adoc` does that, but others may not know to do that so an example of explicitly setting the header row isn't a negative.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] HoustonPutman commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
HoustonPutman commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-692138594
Didn't know it was a vote, but I like the result of the new format. Are there other options or is it just autowidth vs. what is already there?
And we should probably look each of the tables after altering them to make sure they still look good, but yeah I think it's a good idea unless Cassandra disagrees.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] ctargett commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ctargett commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693000958
So, the changes look fine enough to me, but I don't think they're actually needed.
The `%autowidth.spread` works by setting a `spread` class on the <table> element. This is the default, though, so it's set even without defining that attribute. The way it has been with `cols="30,70"`, or whatever it was for each table, overrode that by setting the `<colgroup>` element on each table to set the width of each column.
I suspect if you just remove the `cols` parameter and TODO note, the table will look pretty close the way it does with the new `autospread` attribute.
I figured this out by inspecting the HTML for tables that had been created after the conversion from Confluence (when these TODOs were introduced), such as the one on `aliases.adoc`, which don't have the TODO. I noticed that it gets `<table class="spread">` (plus some other classes) and the `<colgroup>` is set to an equal % for each column. Which is basically which happens with the change here.
It's also possible to avoid setting an explicit `options="header"` if all tables include an empty line between the first row and the subsequent rows. I'll leave that up to individual preference, though - the table in `aliases.adoc` does that, but others may not know to do that so an example of explicitly setting the header row isn't a negative.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] HoustonPutman commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
HoustonPutman commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-692075936
This isn't an issue anymore because we removed PDF support?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on a change in pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on a change in pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#discussion_r488942138
##########
File path: solr/solr-ref-guide/src/performance-statistics-reference.adoc
##########
@@ -191,9 +187,7 @@ You can get the statistics shown in the table below with an API request such as
The following statistics are available for each of the caches mentioned above:
-// TODO: Change column width to %autowidth.spread when https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor-pdf/issues/599 is fixed
-
-[cols="25,75",options="header"]
+[%autowidth.spread,width="100%",options="header"]
Review comment:
There was another example where I decided the autowidth was worse than the manual spaced one, so I removed the TODO but left it as a`[cols=]` style. If you think it's better to keep the `[cols=]` let me know and I'll revert that change!
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] ctargett commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ctargett commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-696366569
I'm a little confused what's going on here at this point. It seems the latest commits increase the mixing of styles, which as I said is fine with me in general, but sort of counter to what you said you wanted to do.
There are 3 tables in `charfilterfactories.adoc` for example, and two are now changed to remove the `[options="header"]` and add a blank line between header row and data rows, but the header param remains on the 3rd table which also includes the `%autowidth.spread,width="100%"` parameters which I thought I showed aren't necessary and are already the default.
Despite all that, the `asciidoc-syntax.adoc` is updated to imply the best practice is defining the autospread, width, and header params explicitly, even though other tables in this PR were changed to definitely not do that. It stops short of saying it's a best practice, though, it just points out that one might see it (when before it was more direct in what it recommended writers to do).
So, I'm no longer sure what's really being achieved here. Removing TODOs that aren't needed anymore because they're holdovers from PDF days is a laudable goal and helpful cleanup, but is it any more clear now what both the internal docs and examples within the content would recommend someone do to define tables? I know that wasn't the original intent, but it got turned into a goal and now it's not doing that. At this point I'm not sure if I should approve the PR (since I don't think it's ultimately that big a deal) or if I should look to hold the PR to some level of internal consistency?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] arafalov commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
arafalov commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693380260
Having consistent best practices encoded in the document, would be a Win from my point of view. I also look a lot at other examples, just in case our use-case is different from generic adoc advice.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-694501316
Okay, so I think I'm done, but would love one more set of eyes! I did tweak the `asciidoc-syntax.adoc` and put in the autowidth approach. What we had listed actually wasn't ever used in the docs ;-) Please let me know what you think.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] ctargett commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ctargett commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693491731
I don't view the syntax of "leave a blank line after the first line to make it a header row" as simpler (which is what I think you mean), at least it isn't for me. Until I looked it up yesterday, I completely forgot it was an option.
To be clear, I don't think it's worth the effort to try to standardize all tables to use the same syntax nor to spend time policing what form of the syntax people choose to use. The flexibility of the syntax is one of its strengths, and we could bikeshed all kinds of options but we all have better things to do. Like if you have that much time for Ref Guide edits, I could suggest several other things to work on instead. We should encourage people to review our guidelines and use them, but at the same time we should support those who are already comfortable doing things their particular way.
Re: the wrapping. It appears if we add `white-space: nowrap` (or `white-space: pre`, both prevent wrapping) to the CSS for the `<td>` (and maybe also `<th>`) element (`ref-guide.css` L#996 or thereabouts), that forces text without spaces not to break.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on a change in pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on a change in pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#discussion_r488942881
##########
File path: solr/solr-ref-guide/src/performance-statistics-reference.adoc
##########
@@ -191,9 +187,7 @@ You can get the statistics shown in the table below with an API request such as
The following statistics are available for each of the caches mentioned above:
-// TODO: Change column width to %autowidth.spread when https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor-pdf/issues/599 is fixed
-
-[cols="25,75",options="header"]
+[%autowidth.spread,width="100%",options="header"]
Review comment:
Should we just keep the old format?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-692124613
So, @HoustonPutman are you voting for `[%autowidth.spread,options="header"]` being the approach to use? I can start with that on all the TODO marked tables.
Do you think we should do it on ALL tables?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucene-solr] epugh commented on pull request #1869: SOLR-14866 autowidth tables in ref guide
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
epugh commented on pull request #1869:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1869#issuecomment-693365546
Thanks for the sleuthing @ctargett, I never thought about the case of no command. I tested it this morning, and you are correct.
So, I think one pattern or the other for tables headings might be the way to go. I know that I learn by looking at other examples in the ref guide, so if I see other tables using the options="header", then I'll do the same. Likewise if I looked instead at the example in `aliases.adoc` first.
I updated `the-standard-query-parser.adoc` to remove the autowidth.spread, and I think it is cleaner...
I'm happy to rework this PR to both remove all the TODO's and
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org