-Re: site updates
Jay Kreps 2013-07-01, 16:42
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
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
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.
> 4. We have the second level bullets for each release expanded in the left
> panel. This doesn't leave enough room for adding future releases.
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jay Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ack, nice catch--that migration tool thing was due to bad html, I
> > forgot to close the link.
> > For the configuration I actually think that is not right. We need to
> > thoroughly document our configuration. Having the code/scaladoc be the
> > documentation is fine for kafka developers but not where we want to
> > be.
> > In the future I would love us to move to a method of defining configs
> > that was something like:
> > configs.define(name = "port",
> > type="int",
> > max=Int.MaxValue,
> > min=0,
> > required=true,