kubeflow
Add version popout to "Packaged Distributions" table
This PR improves the "Packaged Distributions" table by making it clearer how old/new each Kubeflow Version is. Right now, it's very confusing to new users, as they might not know that Kubeflow 1.7 is actually very old (released in March 2023), so they might start the process of adopting a long-abandoned distribution.
The key changes this PR makes are:
- In the "Packaged Distributions" table under the "Kubeflow Version" column:
- Put a hover-able icon that says how long ago that version of Kubeflow was released. (Note, this is the Kubeflow released date, not the release date of the distribution).
- Highlight distributions which are up to date (within 1 minor version of the latest), and de-emphasize distributions which are 2+ minor versions out of date.
- Place warning icons beside versions which are very old (2 = warning, 3+ = scull)
- Remove the very old link to the historical "conformance program" which was started by google but never continued.
Please note, all of the styling is automatic:
- when the short-codes for that distribution's version are updated everything will change automatically
- when we release a new version of Kubeflow, can use the
content/en/docs/started/installing-kubeflow/get_new_releases.shto cache that version's release date into thecontent/en/docs/started/installing-kubeflow/release-infofolder of JSON (the build will fail to remind you if you try referencing a version which it does not know about)
Screenshots
OLD
NEW
Table Overview
On-Hover ("Latest Version")
On-Hover ("1 from Latest Version")
On-Hover ("2 from Latest Version")
On-Hover ("3+ from Latest Version")
@jbottum @andreyvelich @kimwnasptd @terrytangyuan @ederign please take a look at this important style update to the "Packaged Distributions" table.
It should help avoid confusion with new users about which distributions are currently supported. See the preview site here:
- https://deploy-preview-3842--competent-brattain-de2d6d.netlify.app/docs/started/installing-kubeflow/#kubeflow-platform
Since this impacts how distributions are promoted, my suggestion is that it would be good if a majority of the distribution owners approved this i.e. we need 6 distributions to provide a +1 or lgtm
@terrytangyuan: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: kubeflow/kubeflow-steering-committee.
Note that only kubeflow members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.
In response to this:
/cc @kubeflow/kubeflow-steering-committee /hold
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.
![google-oss-prow[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/143327?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
I personally like the version, but am -1 on the emojis. I propose that this should be implemented if a majority of the distributions are +1.
@jbottum @terrytangyuan as discussed in the last community call, I have removed the warning icons (see new screenshots), which should make this PR very non-controversial now.
As agreed in that meeting, we will give people a week or so to make comments about the proposed change (I will highlight it again in the community meeting tomorrow) and if we don't hear anything, I think we can go ahead and merge this.
PS: the code will automatically keep everything up to date, so there is no maintenance overhead to this PR
@thesuperzapper I am more inclined to +1 without the grey out of older versions but I will differ to the wishes of the majority of the distributions.
@andreyvelich I have updated the PR with the changes discussed from the community meeting (all distributions are now blue, and the wording is less strong on the 3+ versions out of date message).
I think you can approve this now.
@thesuperzapper thanks for these updates. I am lukewarm to the commentary in the version popups i.e. the 2nd sentences. The 1st sentence already tells the user if the distribution is current. Do we need the 2nd sentence ? Do they need to be different if the distribution is not current ? If not current, then something like...Please check with this distribution's maintainers to understand their support plans.
@jbottum I have updated the text in the second paragraph so that they all have the same text.
See the updated screenshots above, or deploy preview.
If no one has any disagreements by the next community meeting, we should be good to merge this.
@nvkassus @chensun @james-jwu @yhwang @johnugeorge @nagar-ajay @rimolive @juliusvonkohout @xujinheng @alexeadem please review the proposed presentation of your distribution on the Installing Kubeflow page and provide your +1 or -1 and/or comments. We have put a lot of time/work into this (during the Community calls) and would like to finish up and merge. thanks!
@nvkassus @chensun @james-jwu @yhwang @johnugeorge @nagar-ajay @rimolive @juliusvonkohout @xujinheng @alexeadem please review the proposed presentation of your distribution on the Installing Kubeflow page and provide your +1 or -1 and/or comments. We have put a lot of time/work into this (during the Community calls) and would like to finish up and merge. thanks!
Can we fix the documentation link for the Kubeflow/QBO distro it should be https://www.qbo.io/demos/kubeflow We made a couple of changes to our website. If a PR is needed please advise where to submit it
Thank you for this effort @thesuperzapper! /lgtm /assign @kubeflow/wg-training-leads @kubeflow/wg-pipeline-leads @kubeflow/wg-data-leads @kubeflow/wg-notebooks-leads @kubeflow/wg-manifests-leads
@james-jwu or @andreyvelich I think we can approve this now, as agreed in the community meeting.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED
This pull-request has been approved by: terrytangyuan
The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
The pull request process is described here
- ~~OWNERS~~ [terrytangyuan]
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment