kafka-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sriram Subramanian <srsubraman...@linkedin.com>
Subject Re: site updates
Date Mon, 01 Jul 2013 16:50:47 GMT
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" <jay.kreps@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 <junrao@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 <jay.kreps@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 <jjkoshy.w@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
>> > > <srsubramanian@linkedin.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On 6/28/13 2:48 PM, "Sriram Subramanian"
>><srsubramanian@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"
>><srsubramanian@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" <jay.kreps@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
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> >
>>


Mime
View raw message