lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shad Storhaug <s...@shadstorhaug.com>
Subject RE: New Website
Date Mon, 17 Jul 2017 19:52:38 GMT
George,

FYI - I found the source code for the old website: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene.net/site

I was trying to figure out how the download page (http://lucenenet.apache.org/download.cgi)
is setup. For example, how does it determine what mirror to set as default?, where does it
get the mirrors to list?, etc. Looks like it is just a wrapper around http://www.apache.org/dyn/mirrors/mirrors.cgi.
To get the current mirror list and "default" mirror we could either use the same approach
with cgi or it looks like we could do this using JavaScript: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8962757/executing-a-cgi-script-via-javascript

Hah - they also tried to do something with that green Lucene logo - but it really turned out
bad: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene.net/site/images/lucene_net_green_460.GIF


Thanks,
Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888)



-----Original Message-----
From: Shad Storhaug [mailto:shad@shadstorhaug.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 12:05 AM
To: George Kinsman
Cc: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: New Website

George,

Before I get into responses, what I am thinking would work best is melding together the best
ideas from these 4 websites we have to draw on:

1. https://simpleinjector.org/index.html
2. https://autofac.org/
3. https://lucenenet.apache.org/
4. https://lucene.apache.org/

The first 2 in terms of design and organization. The second 2 in terms of content.

> Those links are great - do you think they should all be as visible as the github/mail
list at the top? Maybe that area should be reserved for the most directly useful links? At
a glance the might be:
	- Github
	- Mailing list archives 
	- StackOverflow
	- Nuget
	- JIRA
The others could possibly go in sub-menu's at the top - That way they'd be visible (as they're
still v important) but not have so much 'air-time' so to speak. Thoughts?  

I would consider the link to signing up for the mailing lists (since it effectively is Apache's
replacement for an issue tracker on GitHub) to trump the mail archives, but other than that
I agree this looks like a good "short list" for the top of the site.

I was hoping you could find the right balance to organization. But as I mentioned above, I
like the way SimpleInjector organizes the data - in particular they have the "Learn", "Use",
and "Engage" links at the bottom. Autofac also organizes their links similarly. Maybe we need
to do some re-categorizing because our "Use" category would be full but our "Engage" category
only has "Contribute" (well, I guess we could put a link to Apache's site there and maybe
a link to a page with known users of Lucene.Net) and our "Learn" only has "Wiki" and "API"
(and I guess user list mail archive), but you get the general idea. I am pretty sure all of
those icons are available as fonts via Bootstrap, so doing something like this should be pretty
straightforward.

That said, those links are just ideas I am putting out there. I don't consider this an exhaustive
list - I am sure by going through the Lucene and Lucene.Net websites there might be a slightly
different way to arrange them (for example, we should probably make a similar "download" page
with all of the info about checking the hashes - https://lucenenet.apache.org/download.cgi
- and put the download latest and archive links on it), and there are probably more links
we need to uncover.

For example, should we have a Twitter account? Do we have a Twitter account for that matter?
And maybe we could have a forum someday, but for now I think we can rely on the mailing lists
and StackOverflow for providing support, since both are pretty active with people willing
to help.

Oh, and I forgot to mention to link to Lucene's site, and there must be a place with better
graphics that we can either build or link to that describes what an inverted index is (rather
than http://lucene.sourceforge.net/talks/pisa/). 

Code Samples

I agree with you and like to have the code front and center demonstrating first and foremost
that the library is easy to use, rather than spending a whole day trying to determine whether
the library is easy to use by experimenting. The only thing I don't like is that when you
are down in the API docs you have to link offsite from there to view them. There must be some
solution where we can put them in both places without having to navigate off site and without
having to duplicate content...

Calling Dispose() in practice cannot be safely done without a try-finally block. A using block
can be done in fewer lines. Also, I recently discovered that you can chain multiple using
statements together rather than nesting them, which cuts down even more on lines of code and
indentation (https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/blob/master/src/Lucene.Net.Demo/Facet/SimpleFacetsExample.cs#L102-L103).
The problem with samples that don't show best practices is that most people will not follow
the best practices if they are not in the sample. A good example (of a bad example) of this
is the default route in MVC - almost everyone copies and pastes it, which produces one route
that entirely overrides the other one rendering the second one totally unreachable. If there
were only a simple example of how to make a proper route to override the default in the MVC
generated template, it would save thousands of people from making the same mistake the first
time they try it. I don't think it would be a good idea to assume the reader already knows
how to properly call Dispose() or use a using block.

> I'm curious which parts you're referring to as extra?

I was referring to the organization of the Lucene.Net.Demo code into methods, and all of the
extra code that is required to interact with the Console UI (other than perhaps Console.WriteLine).
The quick start should just show it all in one lump and assume that the end user will know
enough about best practices to organize the code into methods (which you are doing already).
Ideally, the index sample will be self-contained (that is contain its own sample data for
indexing in a data structure that is pre-initialized), and should be written to run on any
platform without changes as much as possible. I don't think it would be a bad thing if we
had to show 30-50 lines of code in order to make a sample that works.

I suppose technically it is possible to make both the index and search into a single sample
that would make the job easier to run. But then people might have trouble trying to dissect
the code to do what you would need to in the real world (index out of band with search). So,
two samples is a must. But we don't need all of the extras such as NRT, non-standard analyzers,
etc. Just the bare metal code to get the job done in the most generic way - let the user dive
into the API docs (hopefully we can write some good tutorials there) to find the advanced
options.

> I wonder if the first goal might need a slight update, now that the project isn't so
much an automated port but a curated one. Super quick idea: ' Maintain a curated port of the
Java Lucene project in C# that follows the same direction and feature set of the Java Lucene
project.'

Technically, much of this was automatically ported using a tool, and it is still for the most
part a line by line port of Lucene. We only diverged in places where differences in architecture
and conventions differed between .NET and Java (for example Disposable(), renaming "Comparator"
to "Comparer", differences in generics, etc).  We are also using the same binary format for
index files as Lucene 4.8.0 so you can create an index in Java and read it in .NET and vice
versa (some more content to add).

I am hoping to add some more extension methods and a POCO to Document mapper of some sort
(like in Lucene.Net.Linq), but those will be in addition to the Java ported code, not changes
to it.

> As mentioned before I used that one as Lucene.Net seemed to not be very useful on its
own, but I agree with your thinking - it's the main package. it might be worth linking to
a page somewhere (or having it further down a bit on the main site) that explains each package.
I can see there's explanations on the github page, but perhaps with more detail.

The end game is to create an API docs home home page similar to Lucene (https://lucene.apache.org/core/4_8_0/)
that describes all of the packages (I haven't checked how the API docs are progressing - this
might already be in place). I also listed them on GitHub to link to the NuGet packages. I
think all we need on the web site is that link I supplied previously to all of the NuGet packages
(https://www.nuget.org/packages?q=Author%3A%22The+Apache+Software+Foundation%22+Tag%3Alucene.net)
- that way if/when the rest of the remaining packages are ported, we won't need to change
the web site. NOTE: There will be 2 (maybe 3) more packages to add to that list plus the new
CLI tool in the next beta release which I am working on putting together now, after which
there will be 4 more remaining to port over.

NOTE: The API docs also have some content you can utilize or adapt to a .NET version to use
(or when the time comes, link to).

> In terms of logo, are you particularly attached to the Java lucene font/logo? I've been
browsing through the noun project and have found a few simple logo's that have the search
icon that could replace the current wavy thing. I'm not sure I'm a huge fan of the classic
lucene green or the font - it looks a tad aged (though that's probably just me.)

I think that keeping the branding similar between Lucene.Net and Lucene is helpful to make
it easy to identify that this IS Lucene, but running on the .NET platform. The font they used
I think is supposed to look "dated" by design, just like when you go to the Apple store and
you see all of those "modern but old" 1950's style Fender guitar logos (latest technology
hiding behind old marketing techniques and antiquated looking designs).

But I am not in love with the puke green color. I would be happy to change it to a nice royal
blue to match our current themes for the API docs and the web site (it is just a little more
work to do, that is all). Frankly, I think anyone who drifts too far away from a standard
Arial or Verdana font for a logo is making a mistake, but I believe keeping similar branding
with Lucene (with a .NET twist) is a bit more important than that. If you can look at the
logo and make the connection between both Lucene and .NET, I think we have hit our goal.

That said, the Lucene logo looks much better at 200px than 300px. Perhaps I should just make
the whole thing smaller so it won't be so wide - I could probably get it down to 400-450px
wide and make a smaller one that is about 2/3 of that so it isn't so difficult to work with.
I could also add a bit of extra border so it positions better without having to fix it up
with CSS (much like the one you have now). Just let me know what works best for the size and
I will build to that spec.

Also, I could convert that magnifying glass into vector graphics so they scale down better.
Or we could use a different one. I originally chose it because it had a big lens area, so
I could put "magnified" content in it for BoboBrowse.Net (https://github.com/NightOwl888/BoboBrowse.Net#readme).
But if there is no content in it we could just as well use a smaller one.

DEMO

I just noticed that Lucene also has a demo search box on their site. I don't know what good
a search would do on what will likely be a small site with a few pages, but it would be a
cool feature if we had an interactive online demo of Lucene.Net in action, especially if we
could put together a faceted search demo drilling down into data. Let's consider that a wish
list item - a "could have", not a "must have".


Thanks,
Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888)


-----Original Message-----
From: George Kinsman [mailto:george@georgekinsman.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 8:22 PM
To: Shad Storhaug
Cc: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: New Website

Thanks for the comments, they're hugely valuable. I've actioned most of them, with some additional
thoughts/questions on a few. 

1. Fixed
2/4/5. It's a tricky balance to make I think, that's for sure! Perhaps to make the samples
more useful we could link classes in the code samples to their respective API docs, or the
additional getting started docs? I think having an example of how the library works on the
front page could be important to introduce new users, and to act as a kind of lightweight
reference for returning users. Personally I've found other sites that do this more useful
than those that require a few clicks/page scanning to reach the 'guts' of a library - I tend
to try to intellisense from there when playing around. Perhaps it is a bit too much code though.

The IDisposable usage is a tricky one - on the one hand the samples should most definitely
display correct usage, although such usage would break the flow and indentation of the display
as it's currently divided (with the re-use of the writer too). Perhaps it's enough to just
call dispose on the writer/dir/analyser at the end with a comment? The sample itself could
link to some docs on how to manage the lifetimes of these objects with IoC in mind:

<a href="link-to-lifetime-docs">
// Cleanup
writer.Dispose();
dir.Dispose();
analyser.Dispose();
</a>

I actually did use that demo code to help fashion those code samples, though apart from the
obvious IDisposable/spelling error, I'm curious which parts you're referring to as extra?
The code is runnable with LinqPad after installing Lucene.Net.Analyzers.Common (hence why
I used that as the nuget target, it seemed to be the most necessary package) but I wasn't
really able to slim it down any further while retaining some runnable code that produced something.
I toyed with the idea of linking to a downloadable LinqPad sample (I used it to write this
sample, as evidenced by the `.Dump()` calls) but wanted to get feedback first.  I'm not hugely
attached to any particular strategy here, just that I think having some code is important.

3. Those links are great - do you think they should all be as visible as the github/mail list
at the top? Maybe that area should be reserved for the most directly useful links? At a glance
the might be:
	- Github
	- Mailing list archives 
	- StackOverflow
	- Nuget
	- JIRA
The others could possibly go in sub-menu's at the top - That way they'd be visible (as they're
still v important) but not have so much 'air-time' so to speak. Thoughts?  
6. Totally agree - we stick to American English here too just to match conventions with the
BCL/style guides. I had it right in the code, but missed the title!
7. Good thoughts - fixed.

8. Added to an About section lower down. I wonder if the first goal might need a slight update,
now that the project isn't so much an automated port but a curated one. Super quick idea:
' Maintain a curated port of the Java Lucene project in C# that follows the same direction
and feature set of the Java Lucene project.'

9. As mentioned before I used that one as Lucene.Net seemed to not be very useful on its own,
but I agree with your thinking - it's the main package. it might be worth linking to a page
somewhere (or having it further down a bit on the main site) that explains each package. I
can see there's explanations on the github page, but perhaps with more detail.
10. Definitely some great content there! Will look to add some soon, perhaps before the new
'About' section but after the code samples. Or maybe before.
11. Hah. Fixed :-).

In terms of logo, are you particularly attached to the Java lucene font/logo? I've been browsing
through the noun project and have found a few simple logo's that have the search icon that
could replace the current wavy thing. I'm not sure I'm a huge fan of the classic lucene green
or the font - it looks a tad aged (though that's probably just me.) 

Noun Project ideas:
https://thenounproject.com/term/search/932675/
https://thenounproject.com/term/search/24561/


Anyway, just my 2 cents - hope some of this is helpful :-).

George

-----Original Message-----
From: Shad Storhaug [mailto:shad@shadstorhaug.com] 
Sent: Monday, 17 July 2017 6:35 AM
To: George Kinsman <george@georgekinsman.com>
Cc: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: New Website

George,

It's a start!

Since you mentioned it, I took a crack at making some logo images by merging together the
Microsoft .NET logo (look) with the Lucene logo. I am not sure what Apache's policy is on
one project using another project's logo, so if I went horribly wrong here somebody please
tell me.

I made one wide logo (490px) for the bigger viewports and a narrow one (200px) for the smaller
viewport. Not sure if these dimensions will work, but if not let me know what might work and
I will see what I can do. The bigger one has a magnifying glass (the international symbol
for search) which feels like it definitely needs to be there. We can then use a bigger version
of the magnifying glass on NuGet so it all matches.

I also used Lucene's colors which don't match the current theme of the website - let me know
if you prefer to change the logo colors rather than the theme. 

I uploaded the images (and their .psd files) to https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LUCENENET/issues/LUCENENET-589


A few comments:

1. The "unvisited" colors of the links are blue on blue which makes them blend into the background
(making them almost invisible).
2. I am a bit torn on putting the quick start on the home page vs taking Simple Injector's
approach and just linking to it on the API docs. I like the code front and center on the site,
but it seems like the quick start should be part of the API docs so it is easy to find when
you are looking at them. 
3. Some other links we should have:
	a. StackOverflow - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/lucene.net
	b. Wiki - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Lucene.Net (Out of date now,
but I can work on updating it now that I have access)
	c. JIRA Issue Tracker - https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20LUCENENET%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open
	d. Other Lucene Ports - https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneImplementations 
	e. NuGet - https://www.nuget.org/packages?q=Author%3A%22The+Apache+Software+Foundation%22+Tag%3Alucene.net
	f. Apache website - http://www.apache.org/ 
	g. Mailing lists - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Mailing+Lists 
	h. License - http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 
	i. Latest Release - https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/lucenenet/
	j. Release Archive - https://archive.apache.org/dist/lucenenet/ 
	k. Contribution Guide - https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
4. If we do have the quick start on the home page, the first 2 examples should be the simplest
way to create an index and the simplest way to search it (with none of the "extras"). Take
a look at the https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/blob/master/src/Lucene.Net.Demo/IndexFiles.cs
and https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/blob/master/src/Lucene.Net.Demo/SearchFiles.cs demos
- we should have something like this, but without the console app, extra methods, etc. - just
the basic "write index" and "search index". Having additional examples is fine, but these
two should be the most prominent. 
5. The code samples should always show the correct usage of putting IDisposable types in a
using block.
6. I think we should standardize on American English. Having a StandardAnalyzer class being
described as an "analyser" just looks strange to me. Or, if you prefer to localize the site
that would work too, but might be a lot more work than you bargained for.
7. The headline should probably be "Lucene.Net is a high performance full-text search engine
library for .NET". Technically, we support .NET Framework 4.5.1+, .NET Core, Mono, Xamarin.iOS,
Xamarin.Mac, and Xamarin.Andriod, but that is a bit wordy (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standard).
You can use that fact as content somewhere else, though (or just say that we support .NET
Framework and .NET Standard 1.5, which would cover any future platforms MS decides to add
to .NET Standard). "Embeddable" also doesn't seem like the right term to use: http://internetofthingsagenda.techtarget.com/definition/embedded-software.
I know what you are trying to say, but I think the term "library" covers it, since it sets
it apart from being a "service".
8. I think it is still important to state our three primary goals on the home page (https://lucenenet.apache.org/).
Maybe they don't belong at the top, though.
9. If we are going to have a single NuGet package manager console command, it should be for
the Lucene.Net package.
10. If you are looking for content to fill the homepage with, there is some great stuff here:
https://lucene.apache.org/core/ (although there needs to be some fact checking against lucene
4.8.0 on each of these points) 11. It's no longer 2016 :) (well, maybe it is in Australia).


Thanks,
Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888)



-----Original Message-----
From: George Kinsman [mailto:george@georgekinsman.com] 
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 8:41 PM
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: Re: New Website

Hi there,


I spent some time over the last week on a draft version of a new website. I've uploaded a
repository to github (https://github.com/gkinsman/LuceneNetDraftSite) with the site and build
scripts. You can run `build.ps1` to do a one time build, and `build.ps1 -watch` to start an
http server and watch script.


A sample screenshot of it is here: http://i.imgur.com/YR7wSpj.jpg. Obviously I've made some
assumptions in the sample code, and it's a very rough draft - but it's a start, and should
be quite easy to add to. I haven't touched the logo - I don't have the skills to better the
current design.


Let me know your thoughts.

George


________________________________
From: Shad Storhaug <shad@shadstorhaug.com>
Sent: 08 July 2017 17:37
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: New Website

A concern is the amount of maintenance involved with so many tools. We already have a lot
of them, so it would probably be best to reuse the tools we have if possible to keep the learning
curve and maintenance of the infrastructure down.

> . I'm not sure how strict the rules are on exactly *what* code needs to be hosted at
Apache, but perhaps it might be wise to create a github org for Lucene.Net for non-core repositories.
We could then store the static site there, and deploy it to apache.org as per the rules.

The lucenenet project is already part of the Apache GitHub org. I don't think it is possible
to be part of more than one organization.

I have worked with GitHub pages before and they recommended to set it up as a different branch
in the same repo. I thought it was a PITA at the time because I had to do a git clean every
time I switched between branches, but now that I think about the workflow a bit more there
could just be separate working directories for the lucenenet project and the web site each
pointing to a different branch. So, reusing the current repo (on a separate branch) is a possibility.
We could also receive PRs for the doc updates, provided we provide the instructions where
to find them in the repo. And using a different branch means we can easily have 2 different
CI triggers so they can be independent.


> If we used something like Wyam, content updates would become a matter of changing/adding
a new markdown document to the site repository, which could then be built and deployed using
AppVeyor<https://www.appveyor.com/> to apache.org.
AppVeyor - Continuous Integration and Deployment service ...<https://www.appveyor.com/>
www.appveyor.com
#1 Continuous Delivery service for Windows Your new build server in a cloud. Start in minutes.
Enjoy faster results.




No issue with using Wyam. However, we already are using TeamCity for CI and should probably
just create a separate build for the web site on TeamCity (https://teamcity.jetbrains.com/project.html?projectId=LuceneNet_PortableBuilds),
so we don't have yet another tool to learn/provide permissions for. We are also using Powershell
for the build script, so it would be best to use Powershell in this case as well as a wrapper
around whatever tooling needs to run (if necessary).

> Let me know your thoughts on what I've outlined above - I'm going to begin working on
some ideas for design, which I'll update you with as I go. I'd be happy to set all of the
above up, I think it comes down to where you'd be willing to host the static site repository,
and whether you want to go down the GitHub org path - assuming you're happy with the direction.

It sounds like you have the right idea. Actually, I like Autofac's design even more than SimpleInjector.

Although, it would be nice if some of the rest of the team let us know their thoughts as well.
Prescott, Stefan, Itamar, Wyatt?

Does anyone know who has or how to get access to update the existing web site, or if it is
possible to change the DNS record for lucenenet.apache.org to a new location? The API docs
are hosted on the same subdomain so this applies to that project as well.


Recent News/Updates

Frankly, this is another thing that we really should cut out of the design unless someone
is willing to commit to keeping it updated. If we have a design that doesn't have any dates
or versions on it, it will always be current and we don't run the risk of it looking dead
even if nobody touches it for a couple of years. I don't see any dates or version numbers
on Autofac or SimpleInjector's websites. Do we really need to announce to the world that the
project teeters on the edge of extinction because not enough people contribute? It doesn't
sound like the right formula to building a successful community.


Vote

It looks like the last release had a couple of design proposals and the team voted on the
one they preferred (http://apache.markmail.org/message/aafm74wp556dlohm?q=lucenenet+website).
Sounds like a great way to have community involvement...but if there is only time for one
design proposal I will vote on it :).



-----Original Message-----
From: George Kinsman [mailto:george@georgekinsman.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 8, 2017 9:48 AM
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: Re: Mailing List Documentation

SimpleInjector's site looks really good, although as you say it's important to have some code
samples on the homepage too. Some examples of project homepages that I think do a really good
job at this include Serilog<https://serilog.net/>, Autofac<https://autofac.org/>
and Nancy<http://nancyfx.org/>. Each of them have clean designs, code samples, and installation
directions - and each of them are great examples of very active .NET open source projects
too. I think we could implement a nice modern design with these things front and centre, which
would give the project a great web presence.


Where

Each of those projects are hosted using Github Pages<https://pages.github.com/>, which
is a static content host. They use static generator tools like Jekyll to convert markdown
from a git repository into a plain html website. If we used something a little more modern
like Wyam<https://wyam.io/> with a custom theme, then we could just host it in a github
repo. Another thing about those previously mentioned projects is that they each<https://github.com/autofac>
have<https://github.com/serilog/serilog> their own<https://github.com/NancyFx>
GitHub org, with many separate repositories for tooling/examples/public site etc. I'm not
sure how strict the rules are on exactly *what* code needs to be hosted at Apache, but perhaps
it might be wise to create a github org for Lucene.Net for non-core repositories. We could
then store the static site there, and deploy it to apache.org as per the rules.


How

If we used something like Wyam, content updates would become a matter of changing/adding a
new markdown document to the site repository, which could then be built and deployed using
AppVeyor<https://www.appveyor.com/> to apache.org. That would give us a very low barrier
to entry for contributions (a GitHub PR), and allow you guys to interact with the community
really easily. The process from an approved PR to the site being updated would be entirely
automatic. The DocFX work could be hosted in a separate repo too, which could be hosted/deployed
alongside the main site.


I completely sympathise with you that the project needs to appear to be a bit more active
- I think this would be a great step to take to let the wider .NET community know about the
enormous amount of effort you're putting into this new port, and to pull in new contributors.
I'd love to help get there however I can.


Let me know your thoughts on what I've outlined above - I'm going to begin working on some
ideas for design, which I'll update you with as I go. I'd be happy to set all of the above
up, I think it comes down to where you'd be willing to host the static site repository, and
whether you want to go down the GitHub org path - assuming you're happy with the direction.


Cheers,

George


________________________________
From: Shad Storhaug <shad@shadstorhaug.com>
Sent: 07 July 2017 23:32
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: Mailing List Documentation

George,

I started a new issue on JIRA to track the progress of this: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-589.

The only thing that is clear about the project at this point is that we don't really have
a clear idea what is required, so the first step is to start picking brains about what we
are actually building. I would say we could probably have that conversation here on the dev
mailing list and use the information gathered here to list and prioritize requirements on
JIRA, and then work exclusively on JIRA from there. Some of those things to nail down are
where to build it (in the lucenenet repo or somewhere else) where to host it, and how to deploy
it.

One concern is the ability to easily update it with recent news. I don't know offhand whether
it makes more sense to integrate/build some kind of simple CMS or if that means we need to
build a TeamCity task to deploy it frequently with updates, or some other method.

Personally, my primary concern is to keep the project going. It is not acceptable to have
a web site that looks like it belongs to a project that nobody is maintaining (when in fact
we are). We should aim to make it look like a community that people are not afraid to jump
in and help with. I am partial to SimpleInjector's design: https://simpleinjector.org/index.html
with a modern look and feel, responsive design, and links to all of the appropriate places
to get support for the product and how to get involved. A quick start guide for Lucene.Net
is also essential to learning the basics before diving into the API docs.
Simple Injector<https://simpleinjector.org/index.html>
simpleinjector.org
Simple injector is free. Simple Injector is open source and published under the permissive
MIT license. Simple injector is, and always will be, free.




Thanks,
Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888)



-----Original Message-----
From: George Kinsman [mailto:george@georgekinsman.com]
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 1:20 PM
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: Re: Mailing List Documentation

Thanks Shad, great list there. I'd be happy to work on a new public site/design/icon this
weekend - would this be the appropriate forum to post ideas/progress, or perhaps a github
issue/new repo? The DocFX docs look great too, it'd be great to host them alongside/inside
a new site.


Also as an aside (perhaps not the right thread for this), but I'm interested in porting the
TermFrequencyAttribute (patch here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7854) from
Lucene 7 in order to customise the method of obtaining the term frequency at index time. It
looks like the building blocks for this already exist in Lucene.Net 4.8, so I might try and
spend a little time spiking out the idea if there are no objections.



________________________________
From: Shad Storhaug <shad@shadstorhaug.com>
Sent: 07 July 2017 14:56
To: george@georgekinsman.com
Cc: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: Mailing List Documentation

> I'd be willing to help out with this in whatever form. Since this project is an Apache
one, does that preclude it from using something other than apache hosted docs? Something a
little more user friendly like ReadMe (ReadMe.io) or ReadTheDocs might be useful? (ReadTheDocs.io).
Both have free open source licenses/allowances - a great example of readme is here: https://docs.getseq.net/docs.


George, there is a (not so exhaustive) list of ideas of things to work on here (https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#other-ways-to-help).
Also see the 2 sections above for additional things that can be done to help.



-----Original Message-----
From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx540@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 11:26 AM
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: Mailing List Documentation

That's a good question - it's been a while. Stefan do you recall the rules around this?

I also am unfamiliar with those services, but would they support the effort underway for DocFX?
I think DocFX outputs some nice HTML which should be pretty easy for us to host at apache

-----Original Message-----
From: George Kinsman [mailto:george@georgekinsman.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2017 5:04 PM
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: Mailing List Documentation

I'd be willing to help out with this in whatever form. Since this project is an Apache one,
does that preclude it from using something other than apache hosted docs? Something a little
more user friendly like ReadMe (ReadMe.io) or ReadTheDocs might be useful? (ReadTheDocs.io).
Both have free open source licenses/allowances - a great example of readme is here: https://docs.getseq.net/docs.

Cheers,
George


From: Prescott Nasser
Sent: Friday, July 7, 06:45
Subject: RE: Mailing List Documentation
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org


Since that was a while ago, I don't think it made it anywhere. Also not sure there is a benefit
to digging through the mailing list again - let's just make this a re-ask for help? Or open
up a new thread with a better subject to catch some attention? -----Original Message-----
From: Shad Storhaug [mailto:shad@shadstorhaug.com] Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2017 1:41 PM To:
dev@lucenenet.apache.org Subject: RE: Mailing List Documentation I have to dig through the
email, but as I recall we had 2 volunteers offer their help to build our web site. At the
time I assumed that they were being contacted offline or on a list that I didn't have access
to. Do you know if they were replied to? Perhaps they still have the time and willingness
to help...? -----Original Message----- From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx540@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 3:35 AM To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org Subject: RE: Mailing List
Documentation I couldn't for the life of me remember (or find out) how to get you permissions.
So I filed a ticket with INFRA (https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/agent/INFRA/issue/INFRA-14530).
Definitely need to update all of our documentation and website. I'm not a web designer - but
I can help any community member who is and who wants to help us revamp our web presence? I'm
following the progress on this PR https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/206, which I think
will solve our documentation issues. Just need to get a lot of people writing up samples on
how to get started using Lucene and different features -----Original Message----- From: Shad
Storhaug [mailto:shad@shadstorhaug.com] Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2017 1:13 PM To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: Mailing List Documentation Hello, We received a complaint (https://github.com/synhershko/LuceneNetDemo/issues/3#issuecomment-307391518)
from someone who wanted to contribute, but couldn't figure out how to sign up for the dev
list because (apparently) the WIKI documentation isn't clear enough (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Mailing+Lists).
He tried to signup using the *actual* email listed on the page (list-subscribe@lucenenet.apache.org)
and it bounced. He also made mention of our out of date documentation on the web site and
WIKI pages. What happened with the web site revamp project and can we get that going now that
we are officially on NuGet? People get the impression the project is dead. Also, could someone
give me access to the WIKI so I can start working on updating the docs there? Is that the
recommended place to add documentation (such as walkthroughs, .NET platform specific setup
instructions, etc.) or should we aim to make that part of the API documentation (https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/206)?
While we are on that subject, is the plan to put the new API docs at http://incubator.apache.org/lucene.net/docs/3.0.3/Index.html
(with the new version number), or somewhere else? Thanks, Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888)


Mime
View raw message