Reorganize docs and add automation to push them to the website

[derberg]

So we finally have this lovely stuff https://www.asyncapi.com/docs/community

And in this repo we have a bunch of documents that should be visible there on the website. And in future we need to add much more.

So the scope:

• I suggest we move all website related docs to docs folder
• documents that we want to display on the website need proper front matter settings, order and all that stuff. Probably links review?
• we need automation like we have in cli or generator, to push docs to website on every change -> example https://github.com/asyncapi/cli/blob/master/.github/workflows/update-docs-in-website.yml

cc @thulieblack @alequetzalli @AceTheCreator

[quetzalliwrites]

• I suggest we move all website related docs to docs folder

Agreed!

• documents that we want to display on the website need proper front matter settings, order and all that stuff. Probably links review?

Yes, we need to set up PRs and conduct a new editorial review since those changes will make those docs visible on the website docs.

• we need automation like we have in cli or generator, to push docs to website on every change -> example https://github.com/asyncapi/cli/blob/master/.github/workflows/update-docs-in-website.yml

I still don't like/approve of this workflow. Docs in repos where I am not specifically added as a maintainer are often merged without a proper review/editorial round. When merged, I still want docs in other repos to create a NEW PR in /website repo to enforce actual TW reviews. Many mistakes are merged this way because the writers submitting their docs PRs in other repos cannot review their content in a Netflify website preview link. It is not a good practice for core docs maintainers to not be aware/have the ability to review all docs PRs in diverse repos and for those docs to be able to be merged without proper docs maintainer reviews.

[derberg]

Yes, we need to set up PRs and conduct a new editorial review since those changes will make those docs visible on the website docs.

and one document per PR to make it easier to iterate 😅

I still don't like/approve of this workflow. Docs in repos where I am not specifically added as a maintainer are often merged without a proper review/editorial round. When merged, I still want docs in other repos to create a NEW PR in /website repo to enforce actual TW reviews. Many mistakes are merged this way because the writers submitting their docs PRs in other repos cannot review their content in a Netflify website preview link. It is not a good practice for core docs maintainers to not be aware/have the ability to review all docs PRs in diverse repos and for those docs to be able to be merged without proper docs maintainer reviews.

luckily you are maintainer for community repo 😃 and yes, for website preview, we need an issue to be able to address it. I agree it would be nice.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity :sleeping:

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience :heart:

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity :sleeping:

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience :heart: