kafka-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject Re: Kafka questions
Date Wed, 20 Jul 2011 19:08:27 GMT
Good examples.  Thanks for pointing them out.  Now that I see that PDFs are not a barrier to
open discussions, it's up to you guys.

Thanks again!


On Jul 20, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Jakob Homan wrote:

> I'm not meaning to push back; just curious as to the drawbacks of PDFs
> versus wikis.  I was surprised to see PDF-backed design docs described
> as "very bad" when I've seen this approach work well in multiple
> projects (e.g. HDFS-265, MAPREDUCE-326, HBASE-3857, ZOOKEEPER-1016,
> BOOKKEEPER-11, HDFS-1073, HIVE-1555).  Posting PDFs and the
> change-driver incorporating feedback until consensus emerges seems
> like a more natural counterpart to our SOP of posting patches and the
> coder incorporating feedback until +1 is given.
> -jg
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, that's the point of a wiki, sharing.  One person should not own a design doc.
 Frankly, I don't understand the push back for such a simple document.
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>> On Jul 20, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Jakob Homan wrote:
>>> Doesn't need to be, but could be.  It's usually up to the person
>>> proposing the change/driving the discussion to create new versions of
>>> the PDF.  In my experience, when people attached the Word doc, others
>>> would complain that they didn't have Word, and when people attached,
>>> e.g., the laTex document people would have complain they didn't know
>>> ancient Egyptian...
>>> -jg
>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>
>>>> Are you saying that the source document for the PDF is also attached to the
issue?  I don't see it in KAFKA-50.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Alan
>>>> On Jul 20, 2011, at 10:11 AM, Jakob Homan wrote:
>>>>> I don't have anything against wikis - they're great for information
>>>>> that changes more frequently than releases are made and should be
>>>>> user-facing (configuration, FAQs, etc).
>>>>> For large technical changes, like the one currently being propsosed,
>>>>> the PDF isn't static, but will have several versions posted.  The
>>>>> whole discussion is: PDF version 0, then comments on that PDF, then
>>>>> PDFv1, then more discussions until eventually the discussion turns
>>>>> into +1s and the final version of the PDF is attached.  The JIRA does
>>>>> a good job of chronicling the discussion that wiki change logs
>>>>> doesn't.  JIRA just seems like a more natural forum to spur
>>>>> discussion.
>>>>> Also, having the person driving the change updating the document tends
>>>>> to keep the discussion on track and making progress.
>>>>> Finally, new or less senior members of the community may be reluctant
>>>>> to edit a semi-official project document like a wiki, but hopefully
>>>>> will be willing to join in the discussion on JIRA.
>>>>> -jg
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>
>>>>>> On Jul 20, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Jakob Homan wrote:
>>>>>>>>> and then just comment and iterate over there. Is that
not the preferred way?
>>>>>>>> No, that's very bad.  There's no way that others can participate
and modify the design.
>>>>>>> How so?  The documentation is online and the discussion is online
>>>>>>> recorded for posterity. The only barrier to entry to the discussion
>>>>>>> setting up a JIRA account.
>>>>>> The design document should be open to the community to edit.  Not
a frozen PDF document.  I'll turn the question around.  What problem do you see storing the
document in a wiki format?
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Alan

View raw message