You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sqoop.apache.org by Kathleen Ting <ka...@apache.org> on 2012/08/24 23:49:33 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] documentation formats
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 <ar...@apache.org> 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 <ol...@apache.org> 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 <ja...@apache.org>:
>> > 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 <ja...@gmail.com>
>> 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" <ch...@cloudera.com>
>> 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 <kathleen@apache.org
>> >
>> >> > > 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
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] documentation formats
Posted by Jarek Jarcec Cecho <ja...@apache.org>.
No objections on my side Kate, thanks for taking this issue!
Jarcec
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 02:49:33PM -0700, Kathleen Ting 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 <ar...@apache.org> 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 <ol...@apache.org> 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 <ja...@apache.org>:
> >> > 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 <ja...@gmail.com>
> >> 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" <ch...@cloudera.com>
> >> 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 <kathleen@apache.org
> >> >
> >> >> > > 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
> >>
Re: [DISCUSS] documentation formats
Posted by Alexander Lorenz <wg...@gmail.com>.
+1
best,
Alex
On Aug 24, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Kathleen Ting <ka...@apache.org> 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 <ar...@apache.org> 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 <ol...@apache.org> 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 <ja...@apache.org>:
>>>> 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 <ja...@gmail.com>
>>> 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" <ch...@cloudera.com>
>>> 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 <kathleen@apache.org
>>>>
>>>>>>> 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