[FLINK-38945][docs][FLIP-561] Restructure Flink documentation#27541
[FLINK-38945][docs][FLIP-561] Restructure Flink documentation#27541MartijnVisser wants to merge 16 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
72d5849 to
5579697
Compare
|
Thanks for the PR! I've been following the restructuring efforts on the mailing list, so I'm glad to see it progressing., I noticed a handful of RAT-related failures when attempting to build things locally which triggered a validation failure with was also reflected in CI: I'm sure it's a trivial fix. I'll try to carve out some time to build and explore the updated documentation with these changes and approve if all looks good! |
|
@flinkbot run azure |
This avoids now breaking all references that are incoming from externalized connectors. This should be fixed after completing the restructuring, removing these stub pages
…nfiguration
Replace {{.Site.BaseURL}}/path pattern with Hugo's relURL function for static assets (CSS, JS, images). The previous pattern created malformed URLs when baseURL had a trailing slash.
The tab switching functionality used setAttribute("checked") which only modifies the HTML attribute, not the DOM property. CSS :checked selectors rely on the DOM property, causing synchronized tabs to show no content.
Changed to set input.checked property directly, which the CSS properly detects.
5579697 to
a91b832
Compare
Yeah this is a local development problem specifically, it happened for all images. The image shortcode didn't properly work with baseURL for local builds. That should be fixed now, thanks for flagging! |
Thanks for the clarification @MartijnVisser, I figured as much. Just confirmed that the latest commits addressed the previous RAT-related licensing issues (and Azure seems to agree). Approving — thanks again! |

What is the purpose of the change
Brief change log
This PR contains multiple commits, that should ultimately be squashed before merging. What's basically done is:
I also included a couple of nice to haves/extra:
Verifying this change
This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.
Verification has happened by checking out the PR and building it with Hugo locally
Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
@Public(Evolving): (yes / no)Documentation