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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> Shell documentation appendix


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Shell documentation appendix
+0 for updating the appendix to reflect 1.5.0 commands.
+1 for dropping the appendix and replacing it with a reference to the
shell's built-in help system.
+10 for automatically creating the appendix on each build (if the
profile is activated), so it doesn't get out of sync again, *if* the
consensus is to include it.

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Billie Rinaldi
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I noticed that there's a script that grabs shell output and builds an
>> > > appendix for the user manual PDF. However, that doesn't appear to be
>> > > automated as part of the documentation build profile.
>> > >
>> > > So, the questions are:
>> > > 1) Do we need this?
>> > >
>> >
>> > For 1.5, it seems like we have the following options.
>> >
>> >  1. Update it to reflect the commands that exist in 1.5.
>> >  2. Drop it.
>> >  3. Leave it as is.
>> >
>> > Whats the current status of this documentation?  Is it based on 1.4 shell
>> > commands?  If so then, option 3 would mean shipping 1.5 w/ documentation
>> > for 1.4 shell commands.  Can option 1 be done quickly for 1.5?
>> >
>>
>> Yes, it can be done easily.  The get_shell_commands script outputs a new
>> appendix.  I'm happy to do this if we still think the appendix is useful.
>>
>
> If its quick and easy to update I think we should just do it for 1.5.  I am
> not sure how we determine if its useful.  One way is to remove it and see
> if anyone complains.
>
>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > > 2) Does it need to be run manually?
>> > >
>> > > Also, I guess there's some extra steps to convert the LaTeX source for
>> > > the PDF into HTML... regarding that:
>> > >
>> > > 1) are those steps documented anywhere?
>> > > 2) can we automate that procedure?
>> > > 3) do we even need it?
>> > >
>> > > Personally, I think it'd be better to just do the PDF for now, until
>> > > we get Doxia or something similar working.
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Christopher L Tubbs II
>> > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>> > >
>> >
>>