-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
Proposal: migrate select content to ethereum.org #55
Comments
On principle this is a good idea, but rather than think of it as a migration we should think of it as using source content to generate a more usable (and findable) representation. For the case of JSON-RPC, this is a specification which constrains us. Wherever the actual spec is migrated, there needs to be a maintainer/governance of that resource, versioning, etc. A lot depends on its integrity and process. With this in mind, the JSON-RPC spec residing on the wiki is itself a problem IMO! The website now has developer documentation, this is an opportunity to make specs more accessible and readable! There is probably a better way to format the JSON-RPC spec in that context. Perhaps the spec should reside in its own repo, but published to the website. This is how EIPs currently works and it may be a good model, enabling the website to curate and add/remove parts of the spec so it is more readable and accessible to ethereum.org developer doc users. |
I hadn't realized it but the JSON-RPC spec is an EIP! https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1474 The maintainers are organized via "Ethereum Oasis" and also work on projects like the Baseline protocol. https://github.com/ethereum-oasis/eth1.x-JSON-RPC-API-standard EIP-1474 is likely to become the source of truth in this case, so this simplifies the matter. I'm curious about what changes you think will make this more useful for the intended reader on ethereum.org, or is the approach used on the wiki ideal for this use? |
Thanks for adding your thoughts @jpitts!
I'm on board with that framing. From a technical or operational perspective, would that change any of the steps I outlined above (particularly since the EIP is seemingly the source vs. the wiki)?
I agree with this. I think it's another reason to host the content on ethereum.org, where we have defined processes around deploying updates. I think the fact the ethereum.org has more eyeballs on it means better scrutiny on its accuracy at any given time.
I'm open to that, though it would create more overhead for us to maintain (e.g. setting up a CI job to fetch the latest content on each merge). Do you see distinct advantages to this approach? Or alternatively, do you see disadvantages to the spec reference residing within the ethereum.org repo?
A few immediate ideas:
|
@tkstanczak is coordinating the JSON-RPC API standardization effort under OASIS, so he'll likely have a valuable take on this |
@samajammin - the recent work on ethereum.org is amazing. I have visited the page recently after a longer break and I was impressed by the improvement. |
@samajammin how does the editing process look on ethereum.org now? I think that when Oasis process for standardization finishes it will be great for your team to help with the general format of the spec. Would you like to included in the JSON RPC spec calls or prefer to be informed after the process finishes (and then clean the links / duplicates together)? |
@tkstanczak Glad to hear! Thanks for the kind words. I read up a bit on the Ethereum OASIS Open Project - seems like a worthy initiative! I do wonder what you see as the end goal re: JSON-RPC. Is the vision to host specs & docs, similar to the Baseline repo? Perhaps (to @jpitts's point) it would be best to host the canonical specs within the Ethereum OASIS repo to keep issues/PRs/discussion focused on that spec (vs. the ethereum.org repo, which has lots of other content & development activity going on). That leaves me wondering if/where ethereum.org can help provide value. A few questions & thoughts:
I'm open to ideas here. Just looking to improve the situation vs. the status quo, even if it's providing a short term solution 😄 |
@tkstanczak following up on this - realizing I never answered your question!
All edits go through Github - you can learn more here:
Please let me know if you have any questions that these pages don't answer. When you have time, please take a look at my thoughts & questions above. Thanks in advance! |
@tkstanczak nudge 😄 - any update on this re: planned migration of the JSON-RPC API docs? Thanks |
Separately, pinging @ChrisChinchilla & @wtf again - do you folks have any thoughts/concerns about porting content from eth.wiki to ethereum.org? Thanks! |
@samajammin I thought this was something we had discussed before this migration process started tbh, but I am not really working for the EF anymore anyway, so feel free to go ahead with whatever path you want. |
Hey @tkstanczak checking in on this. The ethereum.org team would like to assist with this initiative where you think it makes sense! Please let us know. |
Ping @tkstanczak |
Hey @tkstanczak - checking in again. Any update on this re: planned migration of the JSON-RPC API docs? For now we're planning to move this over to ethereum.org. Happy to collaborate on an alternative if it makes sense. |
Opened up an issue on ethereum-oasis-op/eth1.x-JSON-RPC-API-standard#8 |
Hi @samajammin apologies, I simply have too many GitHub notifications and never read them. Need to get it fixed somehow. |
Some discussions around redirecting eth.wiki to ethereum.org have resurfaced, notably around some efforts to rename repos & community content as we approach the merge. More context here: ttps://notes.ethereum.org/@timbeiko/great-renaming Does anyone have any thoughts or concerns about moving forward with this? |
Hey folks!
Since the recent launch of our ethereum.org developer docs, we've received requests to migrate some content from eth.wiki to ethereum.org (particularly the JSON RPC spec).
Before we make any moves, I'd like to gather input (particularly from @ChrisChinchilla @wtf @jpitts) because I know you've all worked hard to get eth.wiki up & running. It's been (& will continue to be!) a tremendous resource for the community.
Why we think this is a good idea:
The community has pointed out multiple issues with eth.wiki:
ethereum.org has several advantages:
One potential vision moving forward
What a migration would entail:
If people are on board with this, I think the ideal approach with each page would be to:
I welcome thoughts & ideas around this! Cheers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: