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

chore: prepare for v3 release #1806

Merged

Conversation

jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member

@jonaslagoni jonaslagoni commented Jun 19, 2023

Description
This PR removes all v2-specific resources and tracks what needs to change for v3.

Saw a lot of tooling related docs that might or might not need to update once the library supports v3, not sure what to do about that one 🤔

It might look like a lot needs to change, however, for many of these resources, they require a small change.

Tasks todo after merge:

  • Create an issue to track each change needed on the website

Changes required:

  • Frontpage demo animation components/DemoAnimation.js (probably the highest priority as its not something that can be removed 😅)
  • Adapt GH-actions tooling page
  • Remove links to v2 AsyncAPI spec documents
  • Change the last Remember section of docs/concepts/application
  • docs/tutorials/getting-started/coming-from-openapi
  • docs/tutorials/getting-started/hello-world
  • docs/tutorials/getting-started/asyncapi-documents
  • docs/tutorials/getting-started/servers
  • docs/tutorials/getting-started/security
  • docs/tutorials/create-asyncapi-document
  • docs/tutorials/studio-document-validation
  • docs/tutorials/streetlights-interactive
  • docs/guides/validate
  • docs/guides/message-validation
  • tools/parsers

Related issue(s)
Related to #1650

@jonaslagoni jonaslagoni marked this pull request as ready for review June 19, 2023 13:28
Copy link
Member

@quetzalliwrites quetzalliwrites left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Whoaaaa, are you trying to delete several of these docs? 😄

I specifically remember @smoya saying that the tutorials were fine and only a few spots needed updates. I don't think mass deletion is the way to go here. 🤔 We should def discuss more in our Thursday meeting this week for sure, there are def items we want to clarify ✌🏽

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

I deleted all that needed to be re-written, so yes the selection are intentional 😄 does not matter what @smoya might have said, I went through all the docs that had v2 related stuff (also examples) that needed to change, some i fixed because it was 20s fix. Others not so much 😄

But yea definitely gonna bring it up there as well 🙂

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

Also, I am not removing them, I am preparing for them to be upgraded to v3 😄

@quetzalliwrites
Copy link
Member

I can't wait to ask you my other 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 questions on Thursday call 📞🤪

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

Lets hope we have enough time then 😆

Copy link
Member

quetzalliwrites commented Jun 21, 2023

expect to be fully exploited for the entire meeting hour at least 😈

@jonaslagoni jonaslagoni changed the title chore: initial v2 removal chore: prepare for v3 release Jun 21, 2023
@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Jun 22, 2023

if we go with cleanup and removal, then @jonaslagoni all the reference docs prior 3.0 should also be removed from the website that will cover 3.0

Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

All removed docs are ok to me as the list of documents that should change for v3.
However, I believe we should also include the github-actions page as generator will need to be upgraded (updating the parser version) at some point after releasing v3 so it supports it.
Correct me if I'm wrong @jonaslagoni

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

if we go with cleanup and removal, then @jonaslagoni all the reference docs prior 3.0 should also be removed from the website that will cover 3.0

@derberg I actually think it's relevant to keep those, also why I have not removed them 🤔 It's something we can discuss in another issue I think.

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

jonaslagoni commented Jun 22, 2023

All removed docs are ok to me as the list of documents that should change for v3. However, I believe we should also include the github-actions page as generator will need to be upgraded (updating the parser version) at some point after releasing v3 so it supports it. Correct me if I'm wrong @jonaslagoni

@smoya No idea how that library works 😄 Probably. Not something I want to change here I think.

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented Jun 22, 2023

@smoya No idea how that library works 😄 Probably. Not something I want to change here I think.

I confirm you that the GH action usage of that example will change.

      - name: Generating HTML from my AsyncAPI document
        uses: asyncapi/github-action-for-generator@v0.2.0

The version in use of that action will change, because a new release of asyncapi/github-action-for-generator will be needed updating the generator which will update the parser to the version that supports AsyncAPI v3.
So, I suggest you remove the file as well.

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

@smoya this is not a final PR, just the first one, lets get this merged and I can adapt the GH-actions stuff afterwards. I think we can do

      - name: Generating HTML from my AsyncAPI document
        uses: asyncapi/github-action-for-generator

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented Jun 26, 2023

@smoya this is not a final PR, just the first one, lets get this merged and I can adapt the GH-actions stuff afterwards. I think we can do

      - name: Generating HTML from my AsyncAPI document
        uses: asyncapi/github-action-for-generator

But why dont you just remove the file as you did with the others?

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

jonaslagoni commented Jun 26, 2023

But why dont you just remove the file as you did with the others?

@smoya because it's linked in the menu, so it's not JUST removing the file, it needs additional change which I really try to avoid. I.e. why I manually changed the parser page and the frontpage have not changed.

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented Jun 26, 2023

But why dont you just remove the file as you did with the others?

@smoya because it's linked in the menu, so it's not JUST removing the file, it needs additional change which I really try to avoid. I.e. why I manually changed the parser page and the frontpage have not changed.

Ok then i guess LGTM. CC @alequetzalli

@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Jun 26, 2023

@derberg I actually think it's relevant to keep those, also why I have not removed them 🤔 It's something we can discuss in another issue I think.

you mean relevant for what? docs for v2 should be under different domain, spec is docs. So the only thing we can have is a panel above v3 spec saying where v2 is

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

you mean relevant for what? docs for v2 should be under different domain, spec is docs. So the only thing we can have is a panel above v3 spec saying where v2 is

@derberg Hm, I disagree with the spec-related documents, they are THE standard, not just documentation, I always find it super annoying that I don't with one click have access to previous versions. But then again I don't have any strong feelings, I'll adapt 😆

But anyways, we can change it after this is merged 🙂

@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Jun 27, 2023

@jonaslagoni this PR is called preparation, so why not do it now?

I always find it super annoying that I don't with one click have access to previous versions

as I wrote, we can add some panel with easy link. We should not have v2 just like in v2 we do not have v1

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

jonaslagoni commented Jun 27, 2023

Because this PR is one of many, so i try to keep them as small as possible 😅

I have already added it to the todo list

Copy link
Member

@quetzalliwrites quetzalliwrites left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

/rtm

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

jonaslagoni commented Jun 28, 2023

Thanks @alequetzalli 🎉

Gonna follow up with a bunch of issues 😄

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

Ah, nwm, still need a codeowner to review 😆

@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Jun 28, 2023

/rtm

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

Seems like netlify CI is stuck 🤨

@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Jun 28, 2023

yeah, there are no previews configured for that branch 😄
I will not make it required for next-major-spec

@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Jun 28, 2023

/rtm

@asyncapi-bot asyncapi-bot merged commit b35747b into asyncapi:next-major-spec Jun 28, 2023
30 checks passed
@jonaslagoni jonaslagoni deleted the remove_v2_related_things branch June 28, 2023 13:00
@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Sponsor Member Author

Added all the followup issues.

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.

None yet

5 participants