beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eddie O'Neil" <ekon...@bea.com>
Subject Re: beehive documentation: maintaining docs from many releases -- was: Re: updating the beehive web site -- a two pronged approach
Date Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:12:22 GMT
All--

   Given that we're en route to leaving incubation and doing a Beehive 
1.0 release, the need to maintain multiple concurrent versions of 
documentation is growing.

   I'm starting to refactor the trunk/docs/ directory to split the docs 
into two parts:

   - site docs (committers, mailing lists, release links, etc)
   - release docs (v1m1, v1, etc)

Should have the first part of this done today by turning:

   trunk/docs/forrest/src/documentation/content/xdocs/

into a directory structured as:

   trunk/docs/forrest/src/documentation/content/xdocs/
                                                  index.xml
                                                  site.xml
                                                  tabs.xml
                                                  downloads.xml
                                                  ...and so on...
                                                  release/
                                                       pageflow/
                                                       controls/
                                                       system-controls/
                                                       wsm/
                                                       index.xml

where release/ contains the docs for a given Beehive source line in SVN.

   This is necessary work but isn't sufficient to break the release and 
site docs apart, so we should continue the discussion below if anyone 
has additional input.  The next step would be to move the site 
documentation (index.xml, site.xml, downloads.xml, mailinglists.xml, 
etc) into a site/ directory that is peer to trunk/ for easier versioning 
/ updating.

   Just wanted to let everyone know the work is starting.

   :)

Eddie




Eddie ONeil wrote:
>   This fork of this discussion is meant to address the issues and
> requirements around maintaining multiple versions of the Beehive
> documentation on the website at once.  Today, there isn't an easy way
> to do this.
> 
>   The general proposal is at the bottom of this thread which includes
> Steve's responses.
> 
> Eddie
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>>>>More concerns about (2):
>>>>>------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>Just to make sure I understand proposal (2), let me restate it:
>>>>>
>>>>>  We should make a distinction between the release-dependent and release-independent
docs.
>>>>>  Release-dependent docs include the majority of topics like the user
guides, tutorials, etc.
>>>>>  Release-independent docs include the more static parts of the site,
like the download page,
>>>>>  mailing-list page, etc.
>>>>>  The release-independent docs should be moved up a level to beehive/site,
where Forrest will
>>>>>  treat them like a relatively static site template.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's my restatement of proposal (2).  If I've misunderstood it, stop
now, and set me straight.
>>>>>
>>>>>If I have restated (2) correctly, I don't think that Forrest can handle
it.  Even if we can find a way for Forrest to handle and build against XML pages in two disparate
directories, there are still other problems.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hm.  Guess the question I'd ask here is this -- why is this a problem
>>>>for Forrest?  We need to move the doc infrastructure to a place where
>>>>this is possible (note, these are hypothetical release numbers):
>>>>
>>>>beehive/
>>>> branches/
>>>>   v1/
>>>>     v1.0/
>>>>     v1.1/
>>>>     v1.2/
>>>>
>>>>which will result in a website that looks like:
>>>>
>>>> beehive/
>>>>   <core-site>
>>>>   releases/
>>>>     v1.0/
>>>>     v1.1/
>>>>     v1.2/
>>>>   nightly/
>>>>
>>>>where the v1.0, v1.1, v1.2 docs are generated from the branches/
>>>>directory and nightly/ comes from trunk/.  Currently, we don't seem to
>>>>have a clean way to do this because the entire site is re-generated
>>>
>>>>from the current release.  So, things like the downloads, mailinglist,
>>>
>>>>and other version agnostic content comes from the site generated by
>>>>the most recent release.  If a committer wants to add a "news" bullet,
>>>>post v1/m1, they've got to re-generate the site from the branch.
>>>>
>>>>Seems that it'd be easier to make a change to the Forrest XML file,
>>>>rebuild the version-agnostic content and update a single file...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>It is just difficult, in principle, to make a division between non-versioned
parts of a doc set and versioned parts.  For example, take the download page.  If we make
it a non-versioned part of the doc set, really a common, templated element to any doc set,
then, how do we handle regeneration of an older version of the doc?  Suppose we need to regenerate
version 1: Do we included the download page, with its reference/link to version 2?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>To me the download page isn't something that needs to branch with the
>>>>source tree -- it would already be versioned in SVN and if we needed
>>>>an older version of the doc, we'd just sync back to an older SVN
>>>>version fo the file.
>>>>
>>>>Is there any way to assemble documentation generated by multiple
>>>>Forrest runs?  Seems that if we're ever to support multiple versions
>>>>of the documentation that we'll need to be able to do this.  If it's
>>>>possible, we can just go low-tech and checkin the version-agnostic
>>>>parts of the site and generate the doc for each release and copy it as
>>>>we do today.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>All that said, I don't really have any brilliant ideas right now to deal
with the pain that is coming our way as the versions of the docs start to proliferate.
>>>>>
>>>>>Maybe we need a script on the live site server that can run the doc targets
and post the results?  That way you won't need to run processes on two different machines.
>>>>>
>>>>>-steveh.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Eddie ONeil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 2:22 PM
>>>>>To: Beehive Developers
>>>>>Subject: Re: updating the beehive web site -- a two pronged approach
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Steve--
>>>>>
>>>>> Comments in line.
>>>>>
>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>
>>>>>On 6/8/05, Steve Hanson <steveh@bea.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi all:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Concerns and questions concerning (1):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>A system very similar to proposal (1) was in place for the v1-alpha
release.
>>>>>>One complaint about it at the time was that Javadoc-generated HTML
pages were being checked in to SVN.  I am not sure how the current proposal (1) avoids this
drawback.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You're correct -- the Javadoc is checked into SVN, but it's done so in
>>>>>a location like:
>>>>>
>>>>> beehive/
>>>>>   site/
>>>>>     publish/
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>
>>>>>which keeps it entirely out of the beehive/trunk directory.  As I
>>>>>recall, keeping the Javadoc in trunk/ was the issue as we were always
>>>>>sync-ing updates.
>>>>>
>>>>>The difference here is that it's up at the beehive/site/... level
>>>>>which devs don't usually need to sync.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>One question: Are we going to be checking in different doc sets for
each released version of Beehive, so that the tree would look (something) like?:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>beehive
>>>>>> site
>>>>>>   archives
>>>>>>     v1
>>>>>>     v2
>>>>>>   current
>>>>>>     v3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>In the long run, yes.  This would make it *significantly* easier to
>>>>>keep the alpha, beta, m1, etc docs on the site and allow them to be
>>>>>updateable independently.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Concerns about (2):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This proposal sounds like it would break Forrest.  Forrest is looking
for one directory that contains the XML source files: I doubt it can handle a disparate set
of directories.  Runnng Forrest mulitple times and slapping the genered HTML together afterwards
won't work either, because Forrest needs to do link checking and build a single TOC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Actually, I don't think it breaks Forrest if to generate the entire
>>>>>doc-kit, Forrest runs multiple times.  For example, to update the
>>>>>documentation for a nightly, we'd do something like this:
>>>>>
>>>>>- build a nightly distribution from trunk/
>>>>>- copy the documentation from trunk/build/dist/... up to
>>>>>site/publish/docs/nightly/...
>>>>>- svn commit the site/publish/docs/nightly directory
>>>>>- svn checkout on the live-site to refresh the web site
>>>>>
>>>>>Make sense?  If I'm nuts, let me know.  Just trying to lower the bar
>>>>>for updating the site and for allowing us to keep multiple copies of
>>>>>the doc on the site at once.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Craig R. McClanahan: I know that you have talked about these very
issues in Struts...do you have any insights here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-steve h.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>From: Eddie ONeil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:05 PM
>>>>>>To: Beehive Developers
>>>>>>Subject: updating the beehive web site -- a two pronged approach
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>All--
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After having worked on the Beehive website some in the last couple
>>>>>>of days, I've got a couple of suggestions for how we can make this
>>>>>>process significantly easier.  The approach has two parts...  The
>>>>>>first is the most (immediately) important.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1) check the generated website into beehive/site in a read-only part
>>>>>>of SVN.  This would allow committers to generate the website, check
it
>>>>>>into SVN, and then check it out on the server.  This process avoids
>>>>>>the generation and "scp" of a .zip file to the server and then the
>>>>>>"ssh" to crack the .zip file.  To update the site, just run "svn
>>>>>>update" on the live site.  This also makes it easier to roll back
>>>>>>after a failed change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>2) the next step would be to decouple the release-independent content
>>>>>>of the site from the release-dependent documentation.  This would
move
>>>>>>things like the links to the mailinglists, downloads page, news page,
>>>>>>etc out of trunk/ and up a level so that it's versioned independently
>>>>>>of the versions of Beehive.  This is checked into something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>beehive/
>>>>>> site/
>>>>>>   author/ -- location for the content in the tree
>>>>>>   publish/ -- location of the generated site
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Then, the release documentation can be generated, copied up to
>>>>>>publish/, checked into the tree, and "svn update"ed on the live site.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Step (1) is something we can do now and would make updating the site
>>>>>>quite easy.  Step (2) is something we can do longer term but would
>>>>>>decouple the release documentation from the more static website.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
> 


Mime
View raw message