Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Kafka >> mail # dev >> site updates


Copy link to this message
-
Re: site updates
1. I think it is fine to do a one-off since it won't impact the APIs. It
would be *awesome* to get this working.
2. Let's sync up since I think we may be both working on the same page.

-Jay
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Sriram Subramanian <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.