You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to common-dev@hadoop.apache.org by Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com> on 2018/06/27 18:02:00 UTC
site doc cleanup
I'm looking at our svn site, and there are a lot of javadocs there, including those for all the 3.0.0-alphas
du -s -h r3*
438M r3.0.0
1.2G r3.0.0-alpha1
368M r3.0.0-alpha2
368M r3.0.0-alpha3
374M r3.0.0-alpha4
425M r3.0.0-beta1
441M r3.0.1
441M r3.0.2
447M r3.0.3
467M r3.1.0
I propose: rm -rf docs/3.0.0-* to get rid of all the alpha releases, consistent with the rest of the documentation set.
I also intend to create a symlink stable3 -> r3.1.0 on the basis of the 3.x line, it's the stabile one.
What I'd also like to do is mark that 3.1 as the "current" version in the sitemap, leaving 2.9.1 as the stable branch-2 release that the "stable" link will still point to off there.
Is everyone OK With this? Changes to the forrest XML will only surface when someone rebuilds the site; I think deleting the 3.0.0-alpha artifacts will happen immediately
-steve
Re: site doc cleanup
Posted by Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com.INVALID>.
It seems aggressive to delete docs just because a line hasn't had a recent
release. We don't have a formal EOL policy for release lines, and old
releases (particularly old clients) are still used and old docs linked in
places.
Also, sorry if I missed the original rationale, but what do we gain from
deleting old docs?
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:24 AM Owen O'Malley <ow...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> If propose keeping the last patch release on each X.Y branch and only keep
> the versions that have been being maintained (a patch release in the last
> year?) recently.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> .. Owen
>
> > On Jun 28, 2018, at 19:19, Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Rm'd all of 3.0.0-* ; left the current/stable symlinks alone
> >
> > On 27 Jun 2018, at 21:17, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com<mailto:
> busbey@cloudera.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 3.1.0 was labeled "not ready for production" in its release notes[1].
> > Seems that means 3.0.3 is the stable3 release?
> >
> > Speaking with my HBase hat on I'd rather "current" from the sitemap
> > point at a version folks could reasonably expect HBase to run on top
> > of. Unfortunately, I think that would likely be 2.9.1 due to ongoing
> > issues[2].
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
>
>
Re: site doc cleanup
Posted by Owen O'Malley <ow...@gmail.com>.
If propose keeping the last patch release on each X.Y branch and only keep the versions that have been being maintained (a patch release in the last year?) recently.
Thoughts?
.. Owen
> On Jun 28, 2018, at 19:19, Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> Rm'd all of 3.0.0-* ; left the current/stable symlinks alone
>
> On 27 Jun 2018, at 21:17, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>> wrote:
>
>
> 3.1.0 was labeled "not ready for production" in its release notes[1].
> Seems that means 3.0.3 is the stable3 release?
>
> Speaking with my HBase hat on I'd rather "current" from the sitemap
> point at a version folks could reasonably expect HBase to run on top
> of. Unfortunately, I think that would likely be 2.9.1 due to ongoing
> issues[2].
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
Re: site doc cleanup
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com>.
Rm'd all of 3.0.0-* ; left the current/stable symlinks alone
On 27 Jun 2018, at 21:17, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>> wrote:
3.1.0 was labeled "not ready for production" in its release notes[1].
Seems that means 3.0.3 is the stable3 release?
Speaking with my HBase hat on I'd rather "current" from the sitemap
point at a version folks could reasonably expect HBase to run on top
of. Unfortunately, I think that would likely be 2.9.1 due to ongoing
issues[2].
Re: site doc cleanup
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com.INVALID>.
IMHO dump the docs from the beta release as well. anyone on an
alpha/beta release should move on to a GA release and beta1 should
have been API frozen compared to GA.
3.1.0 was labeled "not ready for production" in its release notes[1].
Seems that means 3.0.3 is the stable3 release?
Speaking with my HBase hat on I'd rather "current" from the sitemap
point at a version folks could reasonably expect HBase to run on top
of. Unfortunately, I think that would likely be 2.9.1 due to ongoing
issues[2].
[1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8313e605c0ed0012f134cce9cc6adca738eea81feccea99c8de87cd9@%3Cgeneral.hadoop.apache.org%3E
[2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20502
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 1:02 PM, Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> I'm looking at our svn site, and there are a lot of javadocs there, including those for all the 3.0.0-alphas
>
> du -s -h r3*
> 438M r3.0.0
> 1.2G r3.0.0-alpha1
> 368M r3.0.0-alpha2
> 368M r3.0.0-alpha3
> 374M r3.0.0-alpha4
> 425M r3.0.0-beta1
> 441M r3.0.1
> 441M r3.0.2
> 447M r3.0.3
> 467M r3.1.0
>
>
> I propose: rm -rf docs/3.0.0-* to get rid of all the alpha releases, consistent with the rest of the documentation set.
>
> I also intend to create a symlink stable3 -> r3.1.0 on the basis of the 3.x line, it's the stabile one.
>
> What I'd also like to do is mark that 3.1 as the "current" version in the sitemap, leaving 2.9.1 as the stable branch-2 release that the "stable" link will still point to off there.
>
> Is everyone OK With this? Changes to the forrest XML will only surface when someone rebuilds the site; I think deleting the 3.0.0-alpha artifacts will happen immediately
>
> -steve
>
--
busbey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org