couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <>
Subject Re: Documentation for CI
Date Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:53:52 GMT

> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:21, Alexander Shorin <> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Bastian Krol
> <> wrote:
>>>> you can also just send them as PR to
>>> +1 for the docs for permanent documentation.
>> Thanks for the replies. I'll send a PR to couchdb-documentation for
>> permanent docs then at some time.
>> However, I'll also would like to put a page somewhere to write down more
>> volatile content, like, what already has been done, what still needs to be
>> done, what is planned for the future,  etc. I don't think that
>> couchdb-documentation is a good place for this.
>> For this new-wiki seems to be the best place, right? If so, I'd still need
>> write access. Alternatively I can put it in the readme of the CI repository.

The wiki is totally fine for volatile things.

> Why did you think that idea to keep CI documentation in the couchdb-ci
> repository is bad?
> - couchdb-documentation is the place for project documentation. CI
> could be described there from the point how to setup own build system.
> That has a sense for me.

I’d like to see our docs expanded to not just describing CouchDB the
software, but the whole project, including how everything works, how
CouchDB works internally, the whole shebang. Kinda like FreeBSD has
everything in top-level books, just that we don’t need to split this
up yet, and can get away with different sections of the same “document”.

> - cwiki is the place for community driven documentation. Things,
> wisdom, knowledge and ideas provided by the whole our great community
> that relates to CouchDB project. Having CI docs there is...ok, but not
> sure that it's a good place.
> Why I think couchdb-ci repo is the good one?
> Because you git clone .../couchdb-ci.git, opens
> README.(md|rst|org|whatever) and see how the thing you cloned works.
> Any changes in the CI code would be easily to reflect in the README
> with the same commit, you your docs are strictly bounded to the code
> and that stuff is always in sync. And that's the one and the only
> place that everyone knows to go to read about CI stuff. So this makes
> things: simple, synced, predictable.

The repo should definitely include a bare minimum of project description,
but I wouldn’t mind seeing this on as well.

Bastian, if it is easier, start out on couchdb-ci and then we can move it
to docs.c.o later.


> Sounds good?
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,

View raw message