Repository navigation
Conversation
uros-b
reviewed
Sep 28, 2026
uros-b
left a comment
uros-b
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, thank you @nchammas
let's wait for @cloud-fan too
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2026
Contributor
|
@HyukjinKwon can you also take a look? |
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2026
cloud-fan
pushed a commit
to apache/spark-website
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 13, 2026
Add workflows to automatically build the site and push the generated HTML. This eliminates the need for contributors to commit or review HTML changes. ## What's Changing Workflow changes: - `html-build.yml`: Add a new workflow that runs on PRs and simply generates the docs. This confirms the Jekyll build is not obviously broken. - `html-push.yml`: Add a new workflow that runs on new commits to `asf-site`. It generates the docs and pushes the generated HTML automatically as a new commit to `asf-site`. - `doc_gen.yml`: Delete this workflow since it is subsumed by the new workflows. Website source changes: - Stabilize the sitemap so it's generated in a deterministic manner, eliminating repeated diff noise. Repo documentation changes: - Update the README and release guide to account for the new workflows. - Unify the build instructions so there are only two places to look: `committers.md` and the main repo README. - Add important note about `content/` so its critical role is documented clearly for everyone. This is a second attempt at #697 (which was reverted in #698). This PR needs to be paired with apache/spark#59071. ## Why it's Changing The current workflow creates a lot of friction. Every website source change generates corresponding HTML output changes. Both need to be committed and part of the PR. This makes the diff messy and difficult to review, especially if the touched source affects multiple pages. Generating and committing the HTML is also just mechanical grunt work that can and should simply be automated. ## Future Work There are two main improvements we can further make to the workflow here. 1. Split source from HTML output into two separate branches: source on `master`, HTML on `asf-site`. 2. Automatically publish a staging site for each PR. These improvements are orthogonal to the work in this PR. We can tackle them next. --------- Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
Author
|
Merge Summary:
Posted by |
Contributor
Author
|
I guess release.yml indicates that the script I changed here will be run from the branch and not from master, so I should probably backport this to all the active branches going back to @uros-b @cloud-fan @HyukjinKwon - Can you confirm whether my understanding is correct? |
JacksonKjar
pushed a commit
to JacksonKjar/apache-spark
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 14, 2026
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Instead of pushing to spark-website twice during a release, push only once. ### Why are the changes needed? apache/spark-website#699 automates the generation of HTML for the website. There could be a race between the release script's two pushes and spark-website's CI push that causes the release script to fail. It wouldn't be a disaster, just annoying. Better to avoid it by pushing to spark-website only once from the release script. Even if apache/spark-website#699 is not merged, this change is still valid (though the comment becomes stale). So it's better to merge this before the spark-website PR is merged. In the future, I think it would be better if we moved the portion of the release script related to the website into the spark-website repo and just called it from here. It's not great that we currently have to open PRs against two separate repos for a change that should in theory be limited to the website repo. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? I'm not sure how to test this holistically. Will think about that. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes apache#59071 from nchammas/website-push. Authored-by: Nicholas Chammas <nicholas.chammas@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Chammas <nicholas.chammas@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Instead of pushing to spark-website twice during a release, push only once.
Why are the changes needed?
apache/spark-website#699 automates the generation of HTML for the website. There could be a race between the release script's two pushes and spark-website's CI push that causes the release script to fail. It wouldn't be a disaster, just annoying. Better to avoid it by pushing to spark-website only once from the release script.
Even if apache/spark-website#699 is not merged, this change is still valid (though the comment becomes stale). So it's better to merge this before the spark-website PR is merged.
In the future, I think it would be better if we moved the portion of the release script related to the website into the spark-website repo and just called it from here. It's not great that we currently have to open PRs against two separate repos for a change that should in theory be limited to the website repo.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
I'm not sure how to test this holistically. Will think about that.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.