activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis Documentation for older releases on WebSite
Date Thu, 09 May 2019 17:37:25 GMT
Is the site running into disk space limitations? I considered paring the
documentation down during the migration, but I didn't have any real
problems dealing with it. Also, I figured that since disk space is and
bandwidth are so cheap it really wasn't an issue. I think it's more
convenient to have the docs on the website, but like you said the docs are
in the distribution as well so it's not terribly hard to get them
regardless. I'm +0 on this.


Justin

On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 12:19 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm thinking about just keeping the _latest, as the download package
> also includes the entire documentation.
>
> Someone willing to use the old version would be able to look at the
> specific version.. or even github/docs.
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 5:44 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemmell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think trimming older release doc content to keep the site managable
> > is reasonable, and there are various approaches that could be used to
> > trim things. Over at Qpid we tend to trim down to the last 2 years or
> > so of release docs every now and then (its overdue currently, carrying
> > just over 3). If taking an approach like that, as example there would
> > clearly be old Artemis docs that could be removed. Another approach
> > might be, removing even more docs for version streams not considered
> > the current for some time, e.g maybe now all the 1.x Artemis docs
> > could go except the latest 1.5.6 release.
> >
> > Looking at the size and content of the release docs themselves is
> > perhaps also important. Having a peek at whats there currently for the
> > refreshed ActiveMQ site, I see the 5.x javadocs are using about 400MB
> > per release, but over half of it looks to be for source html. If so, I
> > think thats of limited value personally, with IDEs often pulling
> > source(+javadoc) jars directly and browsers having various web UI
> > options such as GitHub etc to utilise. Thats >200MB per release I
> > think we could perhaps remove and substitute with a link to the
> > release tag.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 22:25, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Do we still need to provide documentation for older releases?
> > > A big portion of the size now on the website is due to older releases.
> > >
> > >
> > > I believe we should stop doing that, after all if you go to the
> > > archive on previous releases, the binary will include documentations.
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message