You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@kafka.apache.org by Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> on 2013/07/01 18:42:27 UTC
Re: site updates
Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation page
which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You could
imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely
mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally won't
change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and
implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't gotten
there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through
things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just kind
of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale
for repeating the command.
3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look under
"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right
now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow I
thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the
shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think 0.7
is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have them
both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it
will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That
way we don't keep taking up space.
I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to add a
"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and
update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements let
me know?
Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that was
to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to read.
It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially new
to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which was
extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind of
executive summary.
-Jay
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few comments:
>
> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it
> probably should be added under 0.7.
>
> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command is
> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console
> producer command twice.
>
> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there is
> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
>
> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the left
> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
>
> Jun
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> > forgot to close the link.
> >
> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be the
> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
> > be.
> >
> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining configs
> > that was something like:
> > configs.define(name = "port",
> > type="int",
> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> > min=0,
> > required=true,
> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
> > broker to handle requests.")
> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method that
> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
> > easily keep the docs in sync.
> >
> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
> >
> > -Jay
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
> > >
> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration
> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old scala
> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
> > >
> > > Joel
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian" <sr...@linkedin.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections into
> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still need
> to
> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me know
> if
> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
> > >>>
> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added it as
> a
> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8.
> > >>>
> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It might
> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian" <sr...@linkedin.com>
> > >>>wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>Looks much better.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for implementation.
> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running in
> > >>>>>distributed mode.
> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs.
> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the site,
> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java api
> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>-Jay
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>
Re: site updates
Posted by Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>.
The introduction and quickstart are all as of 0.8. The design document has
not yet been updated (working on it).
-Jay
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:22 AM, S Ahmed <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On the main page http://kafka.apache.org/<
> http://kafka.apache.org/design.html>,
> is the introduction/quickstart/design reflecting 0.8?
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It
> > would be *awesome* to get this working.
> > 2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.
> >
> > -Jay
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian <
> > srsubramanian@linkedin.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Also,
> > >
> > > 1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of
> work.
> > > I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
> > > 2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that
> > it
> > > goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
> > > the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
> > >
> > > On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
> > > >1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation
> > page
> > > >which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
> > > >could
> > > >imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit
> unlikely
> > > >mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally
> > won't
> > > >change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design
> and
> > > >implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
> > > >gotten
> > > >there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
> > > >2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people
> through
> > > >things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just
> > kind
> > > >of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the
> rationale
> > > >for repeating the command.
> > > >3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
> > > >important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
> > > >under
> > > >"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but
> right
> > > >now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools.
> Anyhow
> > I
> > > >thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
> > > >4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
> > > >disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all
> the
> > > >shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think
> > 0.7
> > > >is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have
> > them
> > > >both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
> > > >longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
> > > >releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases"
> it
> > > >will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7).
> That
> > > >way we don't keep taking up space.
> > > >
> > > >I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to
> > add a
> > > >"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc,
> and
> > > >update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other
> improvements
> > > >let
> > > >me know?
> > > >
> > > >Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that
> > was
> > > >to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
> > > >read.
> > > >It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
> > > >yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially
> > new
> > > >to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
> > > >Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which
> > was
> > > >extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a
> kind
> > of
> > > >executive summary.
> > > >
> > > >-Jay
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
> > > >>comments:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So
> it
> > > >> probably should be added under 0.7.
> > > >>
> > > >> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the
> command
> > is
> > > >> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the
> console
> > > >> producer command twice.
> > > >>
> > > >> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration,
> there
> > > >>is
> > > >> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
> > > >>
> > > >> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
> > > >>left
> > > >> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
> > > >>
> > > >> Jun
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> > > >> > forgot to close the link.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need
> to
> > > >> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be
> > the
> > > >> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want
> to
> > > >> > be.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining
> > configs
> > > >> > that was something like:
> > > >> > configs.define(name = "port",
> > > >> > type="int",
> > > >> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> > > >> > min=0,
> > > >> > required=true,
> > > >> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
> > > >> > broker to handle requests.")
> > > >> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method
> > that
> > > >> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
> > > >> > easily keep the docs in sync.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -Jay
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
> > > >>wrote:
> > > >> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the
> migration
> > > >> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
> > > >> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old
> > scala
> > > >> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
> > > >> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Joel
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
> > > >> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the
> sections
> > > >>into
> > > >> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
> > > >>need
> > > >> to
> > > >> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
> > > >>know
> > > >> if
> > > >> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added
> > it
> > > >>as
> > > >> a
> > > >> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for
> 0.8.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki.
> It
> > > >>might
> > > >> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > > >> > >>>wrote:
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>>Looks much better.
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
> > > >> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for
> > implementation.
> > > >> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
> > > >> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on
> running
> > > >>in
> > > >> > >>>>>distributed mode.
> > > >> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
> > > >> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific
> docs.
> > > >> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
> > > >>site,
> > > >> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
> > > >> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
> > > >> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the
> java
> > > >>api
> > > >> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
> > > >> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>-Jay
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: site updates
Posted by S Ahmed <sa...@gmail.com>.
On the main page http://kafka.apache.org/<http://kafka.apache.org/design.html>,
is the introduction/quickstart/design reflecting 0.8?
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It
> would be *awesome* to get this working.
> 2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.
>
> -Jay
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian <
> srsubramanian@linkedin.com> wrote:
>
> > Also,
> >
> > 1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of work.
> > I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
> > 2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that
> it
> > goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
> > the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
> >
> > On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
> > >1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation
> page
> > >which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
> > >could
> > >imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely
> > >mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally
> won't
> > >change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and
> > >implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
> > >gotten
> > >there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
> > >2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through
> > >things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just
> kind
> > >of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale
> > >for repeating the command.
> > >3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
> > >important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
> > >under
> > >"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right
> > >now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow
> I
> > >thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
> > >4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
> > >disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the
> > >shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think
> 0.7
> > >is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have
> them
> > >both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
> > >longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
> > >releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it
> > >will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That
> > >way we don't keep taking up space.
> > >
> > >I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to
> add a
> > >"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and
> > >update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements
> > >let
> > >me know?
> > >
> > >Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that
> was
> > >to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
> > >read.
> > >It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
> > >yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially
> new
> > >to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
> > >Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which
> was
> > >extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind
> of
> > >executive summary.
> > >
> > >-Jay
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
> > >>comments:
> > >>
> > >> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it
> > >> probably should be added under 0.7.
> > >>
> > >> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command
> is
> > >> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console
> > >> producer command twice.
> > >>
> > >> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there
> > >>is
> > >> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
> > >>
> > >> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
> > >>left
> > >> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
> > >>
> > >> Jun
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> > >> > forgot to close the link.
> > >> >
> > >> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
> > >> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be
> the
> > >> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
> > >> > be.
> > >> >
> > >> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining
> configs
> > >> > that was something like:
> > >> > configs.define(name = "port",
> > >> > type="int",
> > >> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> > >> > min=0,
> > >> > required=true,
> > >> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
> > >> > broker to handle requests.")
> > >> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method
> that
> > >> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
> > >> > easily keep the docs in sync.
> > >> >
> > >> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Jay
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
> > >>wrote:
> > >> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration
> > >> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
> > >> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old
> scala
> > >> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
> > >> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Joel
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
> > >> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > >> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections
> > >>into
> > >> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
> > >>need
> > >> to
> > >> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
> > >>know
> > >> if
> > >> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added
> it
> > >>as
> > >> a
> > >> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It
> > >>might
> > >> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > >> > >>>wrote:
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>>Looks much better.
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
> > >> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for
> implementation.
> > >> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
> > >> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running
> > >>in
> > >> > >>>>>distributed mode.
> > >> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
> > >> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs.
> > >> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
> > >>site,
> > >> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
> > >> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
> > >> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java
> > >>api
> > >> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
> > >> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>-Jay
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> >
>
Re: site updates
Posted by Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>.
Nice catch--fixed.
-Jay
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Markus Roder <ro...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi together,
>
> I have recognized following issue:
>
> https://kafka.apache.org/introduction.html in the "Getting
> started"-section
> the link to the design-page is broken.
> currently the link point to https://kafka.apache.org/08/design.html but
> should be https://kafka.apache.org/design.html
>
> regards
>
>
> 2013/7/1 Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>
>
> > 1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It
> > would be *awesome* to get this working.
> > 2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.
> >
> > -Jay
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian <
> > srsubramanian@linkedin.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Also,
> > >
> > > 1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of
> work.
> > > I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
> > > 2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that
> > it
> > > goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
> > > the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
> > >
> > > On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
> > > >1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation
> > page
> > > >which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
> > > >could
> > > >imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit
> unlikely
> > > >mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally
> > won't
> > > >change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design
> and
> > > >implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
> > > >gotten
> > > >there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
> > > >2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people
> through
> > > >things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just
> > kind
> > > >of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the
> rationale
> > > >for repeating the command.
> > > >3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
> > > >important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
> > > >under
> > > >"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but
> right
> > > >now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools.
> Anyhow
> > I
> > > >thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
> > > >4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
> > > >disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all
> the
> > > >shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think
> > 0.7
> > > >is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have
> > them
> > > >both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
> > > >longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
> > > >releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases"
> it
> > > >will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7).
> That
> > > >way we don't keep taking up space.
> > > >
> > > >I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to
> > add a
> > > >"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc,
> and
> > > >update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other
> improvements
> > > >let
> > > >me know?
> > > >
> > > >Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that
> > was
> > > >to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
> > > >read.
> > > >It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
> > > >yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially
> > new
> > > >to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
> > > >Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which
> > was
> > > >extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a
> kind
> > of
> > > >executive summary.
> > > >
> > > >-Jay
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
> > > >>comments:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So
> it
> > > >> probably should be added under 0.7.
> > > >>
> > > >> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the
> command
> > is
> > > >> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the
> console
> > > >> producer command twice.
> > > >>
> > > >> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration,
> there
> > > >>is
> > > >> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
> > > >>
> > > >> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
> > > >>left
> > > >> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
> > > >>
> > > >> Jun
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> > > >> > forgot to close the link.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need
> to
> > > >> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be
> > the
> > > >> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want
> to
> > > >> > be.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining
> > configs
> > > >> > that was something like:
> > > >> > configs.define(name = "port",
> > > >> > type="int",
> > > >> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> > > >> > min=0,
> > > >> > required=true,
> > > >> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
> > > >> > broker to handle requests.")
> > > >> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method
> > that
> > > >> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
> > > >> > easily keep the docs in sync.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -Jay
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
> > > >>wrote:
> > > >> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the
> migration
> > > >> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
> > > >> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old
> > scala
> > > >> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
> > > >> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Joel
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
> > > >> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the
> sections
> > > >>into
> > > >> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
> > > >>need
> > > >> to
> > > >> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
> > > >>know
> > > >> if
> > > >> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added
> > it
> > > >>as
> > > >> a
> > > >> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for
> 0.8.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki.
> It
> > > >>might
> > > >> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > > >> > >>>wrote:
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>>Looks much better.
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
> > > >> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for
> > implementation.
> > > >> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
> > > >> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on
> running
> > > >>in
> > > >> > >>>>>distributed mode.
> > > >> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
> > > >> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific
> docs.
> > > >> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
> > > >>site,
> > > >> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
> > > >> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
> > > >> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the
> java
> > > >>api
> > > >> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
> > > >> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>-Jay
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: site updates
Posted by Markus Roder <ro...@gmail.com>.
Hi together,
I have recognized following issue:
https://kafka.apache.org/introduction.html in the "Getting started"-section
the link to the design-page is broken.
currently the link point to https://kafka.apache.org/08/design.html but
should be https://kafka.apache.org/design.html
regards
2013/7/1 Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>
> 1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It
> would be *awesome* to get this working.
> 2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.
>
> -Jay
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian <
> srsubramanian@linkedin.com> wrote:
>
> > Also,
> >
> > 1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of work.
> > I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
> > 2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that
> it
> > goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
> > the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
> >
> > On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
> > >1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation
> page
> > >which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
> > >could
> > >imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely
> > >mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally
> won't
> > >change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and
> > >implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
> > >gotten
> > >there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
> > >2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through
> > >things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just
> kind
> > >of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale
> > >for repeating the command.
> > >3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
> > >important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
> > >under
> > >"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right
> > >now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow
> I
> > >thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
> > >4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
> > >disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the
> > >shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think
> 0.7
> > >is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have
> them
> > >both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
> > >longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
> > >releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it
> > >will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That
> > >way we don't keep taking up space.
> > >
> > >I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to
> add a
> > >"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and
> > >update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements
> > >let
> > >me know?
> > >
> > >Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that
> was
> > >to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
> > >read.
> > >It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
> > >yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially
> new
> > >to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
> > >Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which
> was
> > >extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind
> of
> > >executive summary.
> > >
> > >-Jay
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
> > >>comments:
> > >>
> > >> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it
> > >> probably should be added under 0.7.
> > >>
> > >> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command
> is
> > >> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console
> > >> producer command twice.
> > >>
> > >> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there
> > >>is
> > >> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
> > >>
> > >> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
> > >>left
> > >> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
> > >>
> > >> Jun
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> > >> > forgot to close the link.
> > >> >
> > >> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
> > >> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be
> the
> > >> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
> > >> > be.
> > >> >
> > >> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining
> configs
> > >> > that was something like:
> > >> > configs.define(name = "port",
> > >> > type="int",
> > >> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> > >> > min=0,
> > >> > required=true,
> > >> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
> > >> > broker to handle requests.")
> > >> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method
> that
> > >> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
> > >> > easily keep the docs in sync.
> > >> >
> > >> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Jay
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
> > >>wrote:
> > >> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration
> > >> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
> > >> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old
> scala
> > >> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
> > >> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Joel
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
> > >> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > >> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections
> > >>into
> > >> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
> > >>need
> > >> to
> > >> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
> > >>know
> > >> if
> > >> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added
> it
> > >>as
> > >> a
> > >> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It
> > >>might
> > >> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> > >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> > >> > >>>wrote:
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>>Looks much better.
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
> > >> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for
> implementation.
> > >> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
> > >> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running
> > >>in
> > >> > >>>>>distributed mode.
> > >> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
> > >> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs.
> > >> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
> > >>site,
> > >> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
> > >> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
> > >> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java
> > >>api
> > >> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
> > >> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>-Jay
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> >
>
Re: site updates
Posted by Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>.
1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It
would be *awesome* to get this working.
2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.
-Jay
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian <
srsubramanian@linkedin.com> wrote:
> Also,
>
> 1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of work.
> I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
> 2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that it
> goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
> the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
>
> On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
> >1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation page
> >which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
> >could
> >imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely
> >mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally won't
> >change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and
> >implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
> >gotten
> >there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
> >2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through
> >things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just kind
> >of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale
> >for repeating the command.
> >3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
> >important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
> >under
> >"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right
> >now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow I
> >thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
> >4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
> >disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the
> >shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think 0.7
> >is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have them
> >both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
> >longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
> >releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it
> >will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That
> >way we don't keep taking up space.
> >
> >I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to add a
> >"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and
> >update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements
> >let
> >me know?
> >
> >Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that was
> >to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
> >read.
> >It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
> >yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially new
> >to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
> >Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which was
> >extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind of
> >executive summary.
> >
> >-Jay
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
> >>comments:
> >>
> >> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it
> >> probably should be added under 0.7.
> >>
> >> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command is
> >> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console
> >> producer command twice.
> >>
> >> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there
> >>is
> >> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
> >>
> >> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
> >>left
> >> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
> >>
> >> Jun
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> >> > forgot to close the link.
> >> >
> >> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
> >> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be the
> >> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
> >> > be.
> >> >
> >> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining configs
> >> > that was something like:
> >> > configs.define(name = "port",
> >> > type="int",
> >> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> >> > min=0,
> >> > required=true,
> >> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
> >> > broker to handle requests.")
> >> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method that
> >> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
> >> > easily keep the docs in sync.
> >> >
> >> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
> >> >
> >> > -Jay
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
> >> > >
> >> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration
> >> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
> >> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old scala
> >> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
> >> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
> >> > >
> >> > > Joel
> >> > >
> >> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
> >> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections
> >>into
> >> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
> >>need
> >> to
> >> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
> >>know
> >> if
> >> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added it
> >>as
> >> a
> >> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It
> >>might
> >> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> >> > >>>wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>>Looks much better.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
> >> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for implementation.
> >> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
> >> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running
> >>in
> >> > >>>>>distributed mode.
> >> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
> >> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs.
> >> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
> >>site,
> >> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
> >> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
> >> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java
> >>api
> >> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
> >> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>-Jay
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
>
>
Re: site updates
Posted by Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com>.
1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It
would be *awesome* to get this working.
2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.
-Jay
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian <
srsubramanian@linkedin.com> wrote:
> Also,
>
> 1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of work.
> I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
> 2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that it
> goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
> the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
>
> On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
> >1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation page
> >which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
> >could
> >imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely
> >mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally won't
> >change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and
> >implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
> >gotten
> >there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
> >2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through
> >things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just kind
> >of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale
> >for repeating the command.
> >3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
> >important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
> >under
> >"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right
> >now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow I
> >thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
> >4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
> >disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the
> >shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think 0.7
> >is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have them
> >both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
> >longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
> >releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it
> >will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That
> >way we don't keep taking up space.
> >
> >I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to add a
> >"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and
> >update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements
> >let
> >me know?
> >
> >Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that was
> >to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
> >read.
> >It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
> >yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially new
> >to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
> >Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which was
> >extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind of
> >executive summary.
> >
> >-Jay
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
> >>comments:
> >>
> >> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it
> >> probably should be added under 0.7.
> >>
> >> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command is
> >> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console
> >> producer command twice.
> >>
> >> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there
> >>is
> >> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
> >>
> >> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
> >>left
> >> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
> >>
> >> Jun
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> >> > forgot to close the link.
> >> >
> >> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
> >> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be the
> >> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
> >> > be.
> >> >
> >> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining configs
> >> > that was something like:
> >> > configs.define(name = "port",
> >> > type="int",
> >> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> >> > min=0,
> >> > required=true,
> >> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
> >> > broker to handle requests.")
> >> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method that
> >> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
> >> > easily keep the docs in sync.
> >> >
> >> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
> >> >
> >> > -Jay
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
> >> > >
> >> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration
> >> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
> >> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old scala
> >> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
> >> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
> >> > >
> >> > > Joel
> >> > >
> >> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
> >> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections
> >>into
> >> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
> >>need
> >> to
> >> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
> >>know
> >> if
> >> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added it
> >>as
> >> a
> >> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It
> >>might
> >> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
> >><sr...@linkedin.com>
> >> > >>>wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>>Looks much better.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
> >> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for implementation.
> >> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
> >> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running
> >>in
> >> > >>>>>distributed mode.
> >> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
> >> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs.
> >> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
> >>site,
> >> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
> >> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
> >> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java
> >>api
> >> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
> >> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>-Jay
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
>
>
Re: site updates
Posted by Sriram Subramanian <sr...@linkedin.com>.
Also,
1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of work.
I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that it
goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
>1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation page
>which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
>could
>imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely
>mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally won't
>change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and
>implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
>gotten
>there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
>2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through
>things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just kind
>of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale
>for repeating the command.
>3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
>important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
>under
>"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right
>now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow I
>thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
>4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
>disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the
>shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think 0.7
>is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have them
>both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
>longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
>releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it
>will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That
>way we don't keep taking up space.
>
>I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to add a
>"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and
>update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements
>let
>me know?
>
>Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that was
>to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
>read.
>It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
>yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially new
>to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
>Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which was
>extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind of
>executive summary.
>
>-Jay
>
>
>
>On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
>>comments:
>>
>> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it
>> probably should be added under 0.7.
>>
>> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command is
>> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console
>> producer command twice.
>>
>> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there
>>is
>> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
>>
>> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
>>left
>> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
>>
>> Jun
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
>> > forgot to close the link.
>> >
>> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
>> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be the
>> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
>> > be.
>> >
>> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining configs
>> > that was something like:
>> > configs.define(name = "port",
>> > type="int",
>> > max=Int.MaxValue,
>> > min=0,
>> > required=true,
>> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
>> > broker to handle requests.")
>> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method that
>> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
>> > easily keep the docs in sync.
>> >
>> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
>> >
>> > -Jay
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
>> > >
>> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration
>> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
>> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old scala
>> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
>> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
>> > >
>> > > Joel
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
>> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
>><sr...@linkedin.com>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections
>>into
>> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
>>need
>> to
>> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
>>know
>> if
>> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added it
>>as
>> a
>> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It
>>might
>> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
>><sr...@linkedin.com>
>> > >>>wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>>Looks much better.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
>> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for implementation.
>> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
>> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running
>>in
>> > >>>>>distributed mode.
>> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
>> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs.
>> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
>>site,
>> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
>> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
>> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java
>>api
>> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
>> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>-Jay
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
Re: site updates
Posted by Sriram Subramanian <sr...@linkedin.com>.
Also,
1. I am trying to get the api stuff working but it is little but of work.
I need to make Kafka compile with Scala 2.10 first.
2. I have started a design page for kafka replication. The idea is that it
goes as a separate section under the current design page. I will update
the page today and we can continue editing it. Sounds good?
On 7/1/13 9:42 AM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yeah thanks for the feedback, that's helpful. Here was my thinking:
>1. I think it just makes sense to have one design and implementation page
>which describe the most recent release and live at the top level. You
>could
>imagine wanting to read older design pages but that seems a bit unlikely
>mostly, and it will be really duplicative since the design generally won't
>change a ton, so I think it is just confusing. Currently the design and
>implementation page only cover 0.7 but that's just because I haven't
>gotten
>there yet--I hope to get to them in the next week.
>2. Oops that's a typo will fix. I wanted to kind of walk people through
>things step by step. I like to do tutorials like that where you just kind
>of cut and paste commands and watch what happens, that was the rationale
>for repeating the command.
>3. I guess I felt that although we do document that tool, migration is
>important and a person interested in 0.8 would be more likely to look
>under
>"migration" than tools. I like the idea of having a tools page but right
>now it is very incomplete as it doesn't cover most of the tools. Anyhow I
>thought migration was important enough to get its own link.
>4. I agree. The old link structure was insane though as all the menus
>disappeared when you clicked on a link and we had cut and pasted all the
>shared files into the release dirs. Here was my plan. For now I think 0.7
>is the only stable release and 0.8 is beta so it makes sense to have them
>both though that does take up a lot of space. When we think 0.7 is no
>longer relevant I will make an expandable nav with the title "older
>releases" and shove that in there so when you click "older releases" it
>will unhide all the old releases (which at first will just be 0.7). That
>way we don't keep taking up space.
>
>I was going to put another day of work into the docs. My plan was to add a
>"use cases" page that covers the basics of tracking, messaging, etc, and
>update the design page. If anyone else has ideas for other improvements
>let
>me know?
>
>Question: do you have any feedback on the intro page? The goal of that was
>to be something someone who just wants the basics of what Kafka is to
>read.
>It is a bit hard to write something like this because you have to put
>yourself in the shoes of someone totally new to Kafka and potentially new
>to messaging and log aggregation and still explain things coherently.
>Previously the only explanatory thing we had was the design page which was
>extremely detailed so pulling out the essentials hopefully gives a kind of
>executive summary.
>
>-Jay
>
>
>
>On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Jun Rao <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for cleaning up the site. Overall, it looks cleaner. A few
>>comments:
>>
>> 1. implementation: This is mostly about the 0.7 implementation. So it
>> probably should be added under 0.7.
>>
>> 2. 0.8 quickstart: Step 3, when the text says list topic, the command is
>> actually create topic. Step 4, not sure if we need to show the console
>> producer command twice.
>>
>> 3. 0.8 migration: Since we have a separate bullet for migration, there
>>is
>> no need to describe the migration tool under the tools bullet.
>>
>> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the
>>left
>> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
>>
>> Jun
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
>> > forgot to close the link.
>> >
>> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
>> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be the
>> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
>> > be.
>> >
>> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining configs
>> > that was something like:
>> > configs.define(name = "port",
>> > type="int",
>> > max=Int.MaxValue,
>> > min=0,
>> > required=true,
>> > documentation="The port used by the kafka
>> > broker to handle requests.")
>> > If we did it this way we could actually have a dumpConfigs method that
>> > would print out the up-to-date table of configs so we could more
>> > easily keep the docs in sync.
>> >
>> > For the time being, though, we should just keep the docs updated.
>> >
>> > -Jay
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Joel Koshy <jj...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> > > Looks good overall - thanks a lot for the improvements.
>> > >
>> > > Couple of comments: clicking on the 0.7 link goes to the migration
>> > > page (which should probably be on the 0.8 link)
>> > > Also, for the configuration.html file, I used to find the old scala
>> > > docs pointing to the actual *Config classes more current and
>> > > informative. The site can drift over time.
>> > >
>> > > Joel
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Sriram Subramanian
>> > > <sr...@linkedin.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
>><sr...@linkedin.com>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>>1. I have moved the FAQ to a wiki. I have separated the sections
>>into
>> > >>>producer, consumers and broker related questions. I would still
>>need
>> to
>> > >>>add replication FAQ. The main FAQ will now link to this. Let me
>>know
>> if
>> > >>>you guys have better ways of representing the FAQ.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/FAQ
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>2. I yanked the implementation part of the design doc and added it
>>as
>> a
>> > >>>separate section for 0.7. We need to add similar section for 0.8.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>3. I also made the migration link directly point to the wiki. It
>>might
>> > >>>also make sense to convert the wiki to an html page.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>On 6/27/13 7:17 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
>><sr...@linkedin.com>
>> > >>>wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>>Looks much better.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>1. We need to update FAQ for 0.8
>> > >>>>2. We should probably have a separate section for implementation.
>> > >>>>3. The migration tool explanation seems to be hard to get to.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>On 6/27/13 5:40 PM, "Jay Kreps" <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>Hey Folks,
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>I did a pass on the website. Changes:
>> > >>>>>1. Rewrote the 0.8 quickstart and included a section on running
>>in
>> > >>>>>distributed mode.
>> > >>>>>2. Fixed up the styles a bit.
>> > >>>>>3. Fixed the bizarre menu thing with 0.7 and 0.8 specific docs.
>> > >>>>>4. Re-wrote the copy on the front page.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>I would love to get any feedback on how we could improve the
>>site,
>> > >>>>>documentation, etc.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>I would like to do at least the following:
>> > >>>>>1. Generate scaladoc just for the client classes.
>> > >>>>>2. See if there isn't some way to generate javadoc for the java
>>api
>> > >>>>>3. Rewrite the design document for 0.8
>> > >>>>>4. Update the operations guide to cover 0.8
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>-Jay
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> >
>>