Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

*: printable documents #263

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 21, 2015
Merged

*: printable documents #263

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 21, 2015

Conversation

vbatts
Copy link
Member

@vbatts vbatts commented Dec 9, 2015

I do not like having this build step of printable documentation
depending on pulling a container, but the pandoc+latex combo is a big
bundle. This is the minimal and cleanest approach for using these tools,
for now.

Just run make pdf && xdg-open ./output/docs.pdf

Per: https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/blob/master/ROADMAP.md#printablecompiled-spec

Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts vbatts@hashbangbash.com

config.md \
config-linux.md \
runtime-config.md \
runtime-config-linux.md
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is maintaining this hard-coded list going to be a hassle? (ie, would something like $(wildcard *.md) also be correct without the same maintainer cost?)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I thought that too, but order matters for how it assembles them in the pdf

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 09:37:07AM -0800, Tianon Gravi wrote:

+DOC_FILES := \

  • README.md \
  • code-of-conduct.md \
  • ROADMAP.md \
  • runtime-config-linux.md

Is maintaining this hard-coded list going to be a hassle? (ie,
would something like $(wildcard *.md) also be correct without the
same maintainer cost?)

It looks like the ordering is significant, so the wildcard approach
would require numbering the filenames (e.g. 01-README.md). I think
the hard-coded approach is fine, since filename churn has been small
so far, and will only get smaller as the repository matures (excepting
a few isolated reorgs).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 09:37:07AM -0800, Tianon Gravi wrote:

+DOC_FILES := \

  • README.md \
  • code-of-conduct.md \
  • ROADMAP.md \
  • implementations.md \
  • bundle.md \
  • runtime.md \
  • runtime-linux.md \
  • config.md \
  • config-linux.md \
  • runtime-config.md \
  • runtime-config-linux.md

List is missing principles.md (insert after code-of-conduct.md?).

Copy link
Member

@tianon tianon Dec 9, 2015 via email

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 9, 2015

preview here --> https://vbatts.fedorapeople.org/oci.pdf

@wking
Copy link
Contributor

wking commented Dec 9, 2015

On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 09:53:07AM -0800, Vincent Batts wrote:

preview here --> https://vbatts.fedorapeople.org/oci.pdf

That seems to be preserving our “one sentence per line”, which looks
pretty bad in compiled output ;). I also don't think PDF is worth the
cost of the pandoc/LaTeX toolchain (especially if the internal links
don't work ;). I think we might have better luck if we use Jekyll and
include the Markdown to get a long HTML doc 1, letting folks print
that to PDF if they still want a PDF.

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 9, 2015

I did consider jekyll or similar. The we might could have it displayed on https://opencontainers.github.io/specs/ or such.

I do not like having this build step of printable documentation
depending on pulling a container, but the pandoc+latex combo is a big
bundle. This is the minimal and cleanest approach for using these tools,
for now.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 9, 2015

updated. added principle.md, an html target, and a default docs target that generates pdf and html

@crosbymichael
Copy link
Member

nice!

LGTM

@vishh
Copy link
Contributor

vishh commented Dec 17, 2015

LGTM ❤️

@vishh
Copy link
Contributor

vishh commented Dec 17, 2015

Would it be possible to auto-generate docs based on the schema (and comments) eventually?

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 17, 2015

@vishh nice hope. perhaps something like swagger. This is a first effort.

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 17, 2015

what do y'all say about where to have these generated artifacts per release?

@vishh
Copy link
Contributor

vishh commented Dec 17, 2015

+1

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Vincent Batts notifications@github.com
wrote:

what do y'all say about where to have these generated artifacts per
release?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#263 (comment).

@dqminh
Copy link
Contributor

dqminh commented Dec 17, 2015

@vbatts maybe uploaded as a tar file to github for now ? Would be nice to publish them to a more accessible place as well

@tianon
Copy link
Member

tianon commented Dec 17, 2015 via email

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 17, 2015

right on. It looks like just doing a git push of a tag, makes a release, but I can not attach files that way. Files can only be attached by doing the release through the github UI.

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 17, 2015

https://vbatts.fedorapeople.org/oci/v0.1.1/ for reference of the first tag...

@tianon
Copy link
Member

tianon commented Dec 17, 2015

IIRC, you can make a "release" on top of an existing tag you've pushed though

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 17, 2015

/me looks again

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 17, 2015

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 17, 2015

removing the files from the reference host...

@philips
Copy link
Contributor

philips commented Dec 21, 2015

lgtm

@vbatts
Copy link
Member Author

vbatts commented Dec 21, 2015

3 LGTMs. merging

vbatts added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2015
@vbatts vbatts merged commit d7df1b4 into opencontainers:master Dec 21, 2015
@vbatts vbatts deleted the printable branch December 21, 2015 20:54
wking added a commit to wking/opencontainer-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request Dec 30, 2015
At the end of the list, to match its position in the README.  This
catches opencontainers#107 up with opencontainers#263, which I'd missed during one of the opencontainers#107
rebases.

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
wking added a commit to wking/opencontainer-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request May 6, 2016
Defaulting to whichever PANDOC is first in your path.  This mirrors
the existing DOCKER handling.  Folks who want to use the old path can
run:

  $ make PANDOC=vbatts/pandoc ...

I'm not sure why 4ee036f (*: printable documents, 2015-12-09, opencontainers#263)
went with a variable for 'docker' but a hard-coded path for 'pandoc'.
I expect it was just oversight.

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
wking added a commit to wking/opencontainer-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request May 13, 2016
The bulk of this was addressed by 4ee036f (*: printable documents,
2015-12-09, opencontainers#263).  Any remaining polishing of that workflow seems
like a GitHub-issue thing and not a ROADMAP thing.  And publishing
these to opencontainers.org certainly seems like it's outside the
scope of this repository (although I think that such publishing is a
good idea).

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
wking added a commit to wking/opencontainer-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request May 15, 2016
# digest/hashing target

Most of this has spun off with [1], and I haven't heard of anyone
talking about verifying the on-disk filesystem in a while.  My
personal take is on-disk verification doesn't add much over serialized
verification unless you have a local attacker (or unreliable disk),
and you'll need some careful threat modeling if you want to do
anything productive about the local attacker case.  For some more
on-disk verification discussion, see the thread starting with [2].

# distributable-format target

This spun off with [1].

# lifecycle target

I think this is resolved since 7713efc (Add lifecycle for containers,
2015-10-22, opencontainers#231), which was committed on the same day as the ROADMAP
entry (4859f6d, Add initial roadmap, 2015-10-22, opencontainers#230).

# container-action target

Addressed by 7117ede (Expand on the definition of our ops,
2015-10-13, opencontainers#225), although there has been additional discussion in
a7a366b (Remove exec from required runtime functionalities,
2016-04-19, opencontainers#388) and 0430aaf (Split create and start, 2016-04-01,
opencontainers#384).

# validation and testing targets

Validation is partly covered by cdcabde (schema: JSON Schema and
validator for `config.json`, 2016-01-19, opencontainers#313) and subequent JSON
Schema work.  The remainder of these targets are handled by ocitools
[3].

# printable/compiled-spec target

The bulk of this was addressed by 4ee036f (*: printable documents,
2015-12-09, opencontainers#263).  Any remaining polishing of that workflow seems
like a GitHub-issue thing and not a ROADMAP thing.  And publishing
these to opencontainers.org certainly seems like it's outside the
scope of this repository (although I think that such publishing is a
good idea).

[1]: https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec
[2]: https://groups.google.com/a/opencontainers.org/d/msg/dev/xo4SQ92aWJ8/NHpSQ19KCAAJ
     Subject: OCI Bundle Digests Summary
     Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 17:09:15 +0000
     Message-ID: <CAD2oYtN-9yLLhG_STO3F1h58Bn5QovK+u3wOBa=t+7TQi-hP1Q@mail.gmail.com>
[3]: https://github.com/opencontainers/ocitools

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Mashimiao pushed a commit to Mashimiao/specs that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2016
At the end of the list, to match its position in the README.  This
catches opencontainers#107 up with opencontainers#263, which I'd missed during one of the opencontainers#107
rebases.

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Mashimiao pushed a commit to Mashimiao/specs that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2016
Defaulting to whichever PANDOC is first in your path.  This mirrors
the existing DOCKER handling.  Folks who want to use the old path can
run:

  $ make PANDOC=vbatts/pandoc ...

I'm not sure why 4ee036f (*: printable documents, 2015-12-09, opencontainers#263)
went with a variable for 'docker' but a hard-coded path for 'pandoc'.
I expect it was just oversight.

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Mashimiao pushed a commit to Mashimiao/specs that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2016
# digest/hashing target

Most of this has spun off with [1], and I haven't heard of anyone
talking about verifying the on-disk filesystem in a while.  My
personal take is on-disk verification doesn't add much over serialized
verification unless you have a local attacker (or unreliable disk),
and you'll need some careful threat modeling if you want to do
anything productive about the local attacker case.  For some more
on-disk verification discussion, see the thread starting with [2].

# distributable-format target

This spun off with [1].

# lifecycle target

I think this is resolved since 7713efc (Add lifecycle for containers,
2015-10-22, opencontainers#231), which was committed on the same day as the ROADMAP
entry (4859f6d, Add initial roadmap, 2015-10-22, opencontainers#230).

# container-action target

Addressed by 7117ede (Expand on the definition of our ops,
2015-10-13, opencontainers#225), although there has been additional discussion in
a7a366b (Remove exec from required runtime functionalities,
2016-04-19, opencontainers#388) and 0430aaf (Split create and start, 2016-04-01,
opencontainers#384).

# validation and testing targets

Validation is partly covered by cdcabde (schema: JSON Schema and
validator for `config.json`, 2016-01-19, opencontainers#313) and subequent JSON
Schema work.  The remainder of these targets are handled by ocitools
[3].

# printable/compiled-spec target

The bulk of this was addressed by 4ee036f (*: printable documents,
2015-12-09, opencontainers#263).  Any remaining polishing of that workflow seems
like a GitHub-issue thing and not a ROADMAP thing.  And publishing
these to opencontainers.org certainly seems like it's outside the
scope of this repository (although I think that such publishing is a
good idea).

[1]: https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec
[2]: https://groups.google.com/a/opencontainers.org/d/msg/dev/xo4SQ92aWJ8/NHpSQ19KCAAJ
     Subject: OCI Bundle Digests Summary
     Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 17:09:15 +0000
     Message-ID: <CAD2oYtN-9yLLhG_STO3F1h58Bn5QovK+u3wOBa=t+7TQi-hP1Q@mail.gmail.com>
[3]: https://github.com/opencontainers/ocitools

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants