[aerogear-dev] Proposed Organization for our Site

Kris Borchers kris at redhat.com
Wed Sep 5 07:43:31 EDT 2012

On Sep 5, 2012, at 6:09 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx at qmx.me> wrote:

> Howdy again
> I was thinking on how should we organize our site + generated docs. We've been talking on hosting api.aerogear.org, but Kris remembered  me of how important is to have separated -dev and -stable docs.
> So my first proposal for this org is:
> aerogear.org for our production site - generated from our 'production' branch
> staging.aerogear.org the same for 'staging' branch

+1 for this. Only suggestion I would make is that there is no need for a staging branch. We could just use master as the staging branch.
> api.aerogear.org/<subproject>/ for API docs? how should we differentiate from stable and dev? IMHO we need to have consistence across the projects, but at the same time I'm out of ideas apart from api.aerogear.org/aerogear-js/1.0.0.Alpha1/ (version component is the last, being 'current' or 'dev' the current versions)

I am also +1 for this organization. That way, we can keep all old docs live for those using older version and use it as a way of informing user of no longer supporting versions with messaging on the docs. And we can use that same messaging to inform users that they are looking at the dev version which is subject to change and shouldn't be used in production.
> thoughts?
> -- qmx
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list