📖 Add CatalogD doc site

[anik120]

No description provided.

[ncdc]

Please set your editor to add a newline at EOF - thanks 😄

[ncdc]

Suggested change

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (e078853) 39.70% compared to head (fb08f81) 39.70%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #202   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   39.70%   39.70%           
=======================================
  Files           8        8           
  Lines         471      471           
=======================================
  Hits          187      187           
  Misses        265      265           
  Partials       19       19           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[joelanford]

Is it really worth maintaining the bits required to publish a full-fledged website for catalogd standalone?

Would it suffice to have catalogd maintainers just store markdown files in a docs directory?

[everettraven]

Would it suffice to have catalogd maintainers just store markdown files in a docs directory?

Docs directory is reasonable to me. Another alternative is the native GitHub Wiki tab - I've seen that used for documentation for projects

[joelanford]

Another alternative is the native GitHub Wiki tab

Do you know if that content committed to the repo and present in git clones? That's a hard requirement, IMO.

[everettraven]

Another alternative is the native GitHub Wiki tab

Do you know if that content committed to the repo and present in git clones? That's a hard requirement, IMO.

I don't think so. +1 in general to it needing to be committed content though

[anik120]

Is it really worth maintaining the bits required to publish a full-fledged website for catalogd standalone?

Would it suffice to have catalogd maintainers just store markdown files in a docs directory?

@joelanford this PR is based off of the roadmap we've had for a while, in which we discussed catalogd supporting content from various types of sources. We'd discussed having a website that contains details about interaction with different types of sources via catalogd, so that the operator-controller can say "here's an example of a Catalog that sources content from an image registry, for examples and details on how to use ___, ____ and ____ source types, please see ".

I was also thinking this website will host the content for catalog authors in v1. Essentially the content will be divided into two top level sections, "For catalog authors" and "For catalog consumers". "For catalog authors" section is where we'll bring over fbc content/document opm etc for v1.

Are we thinking something different than the roadmap I mentioned above? (I haven't had the chance to catch up on the meeting with Carvel folks yet, or review any of the docs). I.e is there any new information that we should be aware of that changes the answer to your question from "yes it's worth it maintaining a website" to "no it's not"?

[openshift-merge-robot]

PR needs rebase.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[everettraven]

Going to close this PR for now as it has been sitting for a while. We can come back and re-open this PR if we decide to continue down this route.