ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Artem Budnikov <a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Moving Ignite documentation to github
Date Thu, 06 Aug 2020 10:20:45 GMT
Alex,

The documentation source files are still in the IGNITE-7595 branch. I 
haven't pushed them to the master yet, but I can do so if it is 
necessary. Or, you can add your changes to this branch. I added an 
instruction on how to contribute: 
https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/IGNITE-7595/docs/README.adoc

I suggest we do the first release of the new docs manually (just like we 
do on readme.io) to get a sense of how the process works and how to 
automate it better. Then, I'll document the entire process on our wiki.

Sounds good?

Artem

On 06.08.2020 11:37, Alex Plehanov wrote:
> Denis, Artem,
>
> I've marked the "tracing" ticket as important.
> Also, I've added a new section to the release page [1] and created
> documentation tickets for some features. Now there is a documentation
> ticket exists for each important feature implemented in 2.9.
> I know that some Igniters are currently working on documentation, but the
> question is still unanswered: where to push changes? To GitHub, or to
> readme.io? Guys, can you clarify, please?
>
> [1]:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.9#ApacheIgnite2.9-Documentationtasksforimportantfeaturesimplementedin2.9
>
>
> вт, 4 авг. 2020 г. в 21:08, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>:
>
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> Certainly, the new documentation should not be treated as a showstopper,
>> and if the code is ready much earlier, then we can release the docs on
>> readme.io.
>>
>> But, it's not clear what's the documentation readiness status. As per our
>> updated release process, the docs need to be ready before the voting is
>> started [1]. That change was discussed and introduced after our
>> lessons-learned conversations related to the 2.8 release.
>>
>> Could you please help to figure out the status by preparing a list of
>> documentation tasks that must be completed before the voting time (all
>> significant features and changes)? The "most important tasks" section [2]
>> already lists most of them, but the list might be incomplete. For example,
>> the tracing feature should be added in 2.9, but it's not in the important
>> tasks list. There might be something else profound that we should put on
>> paper.
>>
>> Once we get the list, we can start working with the contributors in charge
>> to get things done. If some documentation pages won't be finished in 2
>> weeks from now, then it's reasonable to contribute the 2.9 docs to the new
>> docs repository that will be ready for the release in 3-4 weeks. Just my
>> thinking.
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-4.1EnsureDocumentationReadinessandAccouncementBlogPostActivity
>> [2]
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.9#ApacheIgnite2.9-Themostimportantreleasetasks
>>
>> -
>> Denis
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 5:54 AM Alex Plehanov <plehanov.alex@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Denis,
>>>
>>> We have some performance drop on benchmarks, so we need some time to find
>>> problematic commit and analyze it. I hope this will be completed during
>> the
>>> current week and we move to the "Vote preparation" phase to the start of
>>> next week.
>>> I think waiting for another month due to documentation it's too much.
>>> Do we have an option to release with documentation on readme.io and then
>>> move documentation in the new format during next month?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> пн, 3 авг. 2020 г. в 17:55, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>:
>>>
>>>> I would wait for 3-4 weeks and release the new docs in 2.9. It means
>> that
>>>> the release should be announced the first week of September which is
>> not
>>> a
>>>> huge slip. Moreover, it feels like the testing phase and release
>>> procedures
>>>> will not be completed sooner.
>>>>
>>>> So, I would suggest contributing 2.9 related page to the new
>>> documentation
>>>> repository.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Denis
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, August 3, 2020, Artem Budnikov <a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> The new docs project is not finished yet. There are still a lot of
>>> pages
>>>>> to port to the new format, and we are still working on the
>> integration
>>>> with
>>>>> the web-site. Nevertheless, we can try to publish the Ignite 2.9
>>>>> documentation on the web-site in the new format. The documentation
>> will
>>>> not
>>>>> be 100% complete, but it will be updated significantly and will
>> contain
>>>>> most of the information our users need. Actually, I would like to do
>>>> that,
>>>>> but it all depends on how much time I have before Ignite 2.9 is
>>> released.
>>>>> I'd say 2-3 weeks would be enough for me to finish all tasks that are
>>>>> critical for the publication.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we can wait with release 2.9 that much time, then I'll prepare the
>>>>> instruction on how to contribute to the docs.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Artem
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03.08.2020 12:24, Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Artem,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to submit some documentation changes for 2.9 release.
>> Should
>>>>>> I update docs on readme.io or publish it on ignite.apache.org?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 19:06, Artem Budnikov
>>>>>> <a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Alex,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry, I missed this message. There is still a lot of work on
the
>>> docs.
>>>>>>> When is version 2.9 going to be released?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Artem
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22.07.2020 10:35, Alex Plehanov wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Guys,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What about documentation for 2.9 release? Are we going to
publish
>> it
>>>> on
>>>>>>>> readme.io or publish it on ignite.apache.org?
>>>>>>>> What about new edits? Should we still edit pages on readme.io
or
>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>> make changes in git repository?
>>>>>>>> Artem, could you please clarify the current documentation
>> workflow?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> пн, 20 июл. 2020 г. в 16:42, Artem Budnikov <
>>>>>>>> a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Denis,
>>>>>>>>> How about the next step of taking the HTML and committing
it to
>> the
>>>>>>>>> website
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> repository? Did you have a chance to think through
this step?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, I'll look into this this week. This shouldn't be
very
>>> difficult.
>>>>>>>>> -Artem
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18.07.2020 00:43, Denis Magda wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Worked out well on my end. Thanks for sending the
update!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How about the next step of taking the HTML and committing
it to
>>> the
>>>>>>>>> website
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> repository? Did you have a chance to think through
this step?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>> Denis
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:27 AM Artem Budnikov <
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>>>> I've prepared the initial set of source files
for the Ignite
>>>>>>>>>>> documentation. If you are interested, you can
take a look at
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/IGNITE-7595/docs
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You can run a local web-server (jekyll) if you
want to view the
>>>> docs
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>> your browser. Refer to the README.adoc for instructions.
Some
>>>> people
>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>> troubles installing Jekyll locally, so I added
an instruction
>> on
>>>> how
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> use jekyll docker image.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you have any comments on the overall approach,
please let me
>>>> know.
>>>>>>>>>>> The styles and content are still a work in progress,
so please
>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>> report issues related to that.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Artem
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 26.06.2020 01:54, Guru Stron wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for migrating docs to github. It will
allow an easier
>>>>>>>>>>>> contribution
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> docs, I think. As a nice feature - adding an edit
link (submit
>> PR
>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>> docs)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the document page on site.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As for keeping them separate - Microsoft
keeps docs for it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> products
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> separate repos, for example.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 15:48, Artem Budnikov
<
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, let's give it a try.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The way I see it, the documentation source
files will be
>>> located
>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> "/docs" folder, including UI templates/styles, asciidoc
files,
>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> build
>>>>>>>>>> scripts. I'll start experimenting with this and will
let you
>> know
>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>>> basic setup is ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Artem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 23.06.2020 20:19, Denis Magda wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe that by keeping the documentation
sources in the
>>> same
>>>>>>>>>>>>> repository
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the source code will help us
to prepare and release all
>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>> artifacts at the same time. So, +1 for hosting
raw
>> documentation
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ascii-doc
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pages in the main Ignite repo. However,
the HTML version
>> needs
>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reside
>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Ignite website, which is similar
to the API docs. We can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tools
>>>>>>>>>>>> to do this in one click.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Post-reviews are not prohibited in
Apache, quite the
>> opposite,
>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>> suit the documentation contribution process better.
It's ok if
>>>>>>>>>>>>> committers
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the documentation merge the changes first
and ask for a
>>> review
>>>>>>>>>>>>> later
>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 6:53 AM Artem
Budnikov <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pavel,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think so: we can't add
snippets pointing to new
>> APIs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate repo,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snippets are kept together with
the docs, they /don't need/
>>> to
>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stored
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the main repo, although they can. They
are compilable and
>> up
>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> date.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I update the docs and API samples for features
that hasn't
>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the GridGain docs and never thought it
was a problem. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>> that you don't want to do extra work when adding
code samples,
>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>> looks like just an inconvenience. Let me suggest
this: Let's
>> think
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>> a solution that will be comfortable for you,
I'm pretty sure
>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inconvenience can be solved technically.
But I need time to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we can't see the docs when doing
global search (and/or
>>> replace)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>> the IDE.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you can add the docs
repo to your IDE as a
>> project. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>>> it in the beginning but then switched to
Sublime Text, because
>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>> convenient to me. We are looking at it from
different
>>>> perspectives.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to create a process that is comfortable
for tech
>> writers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather
>>>>>>>>>> than developers. And everybody has to accept some
kind of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compromise:)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, no one is able to "freely" commit code
to Apache master,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>> is a process to follow - CI, reviews, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Same should happen for
the docs, separate repo or not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But a separate repo will
require separate
>>>> ownership/management
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (probably?),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but we already have everything
in the main repo, why
>>>> introduce
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overhead?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just think about it from my perspective.
That creates a
>> HUUUGE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overhead
>>>>>>>>>>>> for technical writers who work on the docs,
and they are the
>>> ones
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>>>>> provide 90% of updates. I agree about the review
process, and
>> I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going
>>>>>>>>>>>> to think it over. But now it seems that we
don't have to
>> impose
>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strict process that impedes preparation
of the docs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Artem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 23.06.2020 15:35, Pavel Tupitsyn
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all your pros points work
just as well for a separate
>>>> repository
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think so: we can't
add snippets pointing to new
>> APIs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate repo,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we can't see the docs when
doing global search (and/or
>>>> replace)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>> the IDE.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am able to freely commit
to master
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, no one is able to "freely"
commit code to Apache
>>> master,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>> is a process to follow - CI, reviews, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Same should happen for the
docs, separate repo or not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But a separate repo will
require separate
>>> ownership/management
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (probably?),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but we already have everything
in the main repo, why
>>> introduce
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overhead?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 2:59 PM Artem
Budnikov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com
<mailto:
>> a.budnikov.ignite@gmai
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> l.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           Pavel,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           As far as I can
see, all your pros points work
>> just
>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a
>>>>>>>>>>>>           separate repository (except for
"everybody knows
>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it"). I
>>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           mind keeping the docs in
Ignite repo as long as I
>> am
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> able to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           commit to master. Will
I be able to do that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           -Artem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           On 23.06.2020 14:04,
Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > Ilya, Artem,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > "Separate
repo just because we can't finish
>> docs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release"
>>>>>>>>>>>>           > does not make sense to me.
My proposal is:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > - Working
version is in the master branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > - When a release
branch is created, e.g.
>>>> ignite-2.9,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>>           > ignite-2.9-docs and update
it as long as we want.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > Pros (compared
to a separate repo):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > - Docs can
be updated along with the code, same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> process
>>>>>>>>>>>>           > - Visibility - everyone knows
about main repo, docs
>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           searchable together
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > with code
in the IDE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > - Code snippets
can reference the actual code
>> and
>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>>>>>>           they compile
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > - Code snippets
can be tested on TC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > GridGain uses
a separate repo for their docs,
>> and
>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proved
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>           be less than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > optimal.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > Especially
when adding samples for new APIs
>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yet
>>>>>>>>>>           released.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           > On Tue, Jun
23, 2020 at 1:19 PM Artem Budnikov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           <a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com
<mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a.budnikov.ignite@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>           > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> Pavel,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> Yes, I
mean a separate repository. The reason
>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           documentation is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> usually
updated after the product version is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released. As
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>>>>>>           pointed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> out, keeping
the docs in the main Ignite
>>>> repository
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> entail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> completing the
docs before the release date,
>> which
>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           possible under
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> current
circumstances.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> Ilya,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> You can
look at your company's documentation
>>> for a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> working
>>>>>>>>>>           prototype
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> turned
production-ready approach. The approach
>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tested
>>>>>>>>>>>>           for a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> while
and proved to be successful, at least
>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> respect
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>>>>>           goals here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> -Artem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> On 23.06.2020
12:48, Ilya Kasnacheev wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> Hello!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> I'm
not really sold on the github version
>> yet,
>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>>>           see a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> prototype
of such documentation before
>>> deciding,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>> it'w
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> 0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> Pavel,
we don't have enough discipline to
>> make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> documentation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> is
ready at the time of release, and we may
>>> need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to add
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           notices here and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> there
after a release is already out. This
>>> means,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate
>>>>>>>>>> git
>>>>>>>>>>>>           >> repository,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> or
at least separate git tag on that
>>> repository,
>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed.
>>>>>>>>>>           >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           >>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -
>>>> Denis
>>>>

Mime
View raw message