cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filip Maj <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS][DOCS] Revert a change
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2017 19:32:08 GMT
To be clear, we don't need to redesign anything to automate docs
deployment. It is in the realm of possibility to simply automate what
we have today. I just feel like what we have today is a design where
translations are an afterthought, which I think is a bad tradeoff,
especially given the popularity of cordova outside of english-speaking
countries. _IF_ we were to agree that a redesign is worthwhile, then I
would recommend we do that first before automating deployment. If the
PMC deems a redesign of the cordova-docs repo is not important, then
so be it, and we can automate what we have.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Dmitry Blotsky
<> wrote:
> @fil: why is reworking the docs repo needed for automatic deployment?
> @steve: could you merge it then? I'm far too rusty on my Cordova-ing to remember how
to set up my remotes to push to the ASF repo, sorry. :(
> Kindly,
> Dmitry
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Filip Maj <> wrote:
>> We have an issue posted to make docs publishing automatic:
>> Not to derail the topic, but there is a longer wishlist in that issue,
>> and I do think achieving the goals in that issue would require
>> reworking the docs repository quite a bit. We can discuss details in
>> the issue thread.
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Dmitry Blotsky
>> <> wrote:
>>> Yes, ideally our deployment process should be automated. Also, it should *not*
be an SVN commit. It should be an rsync or an scp command. I would support any initiatives
to move to either one of those. If we had automated deployment, this discussion would be moot.
>>> How much would it cost us to just have a VPS with nginx?
>>> Switching to the topic of deployment docs now. Thanks, Shaz, for bringing this
up in discussion. My opinion was that we shouldn't have impactful commands be copy-paste-able,
which is why I had the instruction to commit in paragraph text. I think that if a committer
doesn't read the full text of the deployment docs, *they should not be deploying*. I can see
the argument that if they do read the text but just don't know *how* to commit in SVN, it's
annoying to search. However at the top of that section is an explicit link to a quick SVN
tutorial. I understand that not everyone reads the fine print, but IMO committers should,
and we should explicitly discourage that behaviour.
>>> Ultimately I'm going to defer to Shaz here, but I think it's important to consider
the benefits of making deployment *feel* more serious by making RTFD necessary.
>>> Kindly,
>>> Dmitry
>>>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 6:30 AM, Jan Piotrowski <>
>>>> I am actually surprised deploying is a manual process at all.
>>>> Having read the steps, I understand why of course.
>>>> As a person that jumps in on all kinds of projects, I absolutely
>>>> prefer docs that list each and every little step needed (including all
>>>> the `cd` etc).
>>>> The need for manual steps or checks could be emphasized by using a
>>>> numbered list or checklist for the individual steps.
>>>> (Will this stay on SVN even after the repo switch to Github? Merging
>>>> and `gh-pages` is so nice and simple)
>>>> -J
>>>> 2017-09-13 9:02 GMT+02:00 Shazron <>:
>>>>> This relates solely to instructions on how to *build* the site, and not
>>>>> contents of the site itself.
>>>>> Bringing this up here for discussion since a committer wants to revert
>>>>> change by another committer, and there is potential for disagreement.
>>>>> The pull request to revert is here:
>>>>> There has been discussion on the original change here:
>>>>> Two issues here:
>>>>> 1. The change from `gulp build --prod` to `npm run serve`
>>>>> 2. This instruction here (not reverted in the PR):
>>>>> Issue (1) has some discussion in the GH link above for the original change.
>>>>> Issue (2) there was some discussion in the Cordova Slack, that the reason
>>>>> the `svn commit` wasn't there in the first place is to prevent copy/paste
>>>>> of the commands without going through the changes step by step since
>>>>> deploying to a site is an expensive operation that can screw up the site
>>>>> proper care was not done.
>>>>> My reason for adding the command was that the instructions are not complete
>>>>> (when I had to do it myself when updating the docs for cordova-ios
>>>>> release). I understand the rationale, but the instructions seem incomplete
>>>>> (especially for new committers that haven't heard of SVN, I know they
>>>>> Google it, but that's more friction) and my other reason is: we should
>>>>> trust that committers will do the right thing.
>>>>> Not to make a mountain out of a mole-hill but it's important that these
>>>>> revert discussions be out in the open so as misunderstandings/hurt feelings
>>>>> don't occur, and we can nip it in the bud.
>>>>> Thoughts from the community?
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message