Add Blog Posts: 《Volcano 源码分析》（一）&（二）

[daniel-hutao]

• Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

• [x] The commit message follows our guidelines

• What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)

/kind documentation

• What this PR does / why we need it:

Two blogs about Volcano

• Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

N/A

[volcano-sh-bot]

Welcome @daniel-hutao!

It looks like this is your first PR to volcano-sh/website 馃帀.

Thank you, and welcome to Volcano. :smiley:

[volcano-sh-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Arhell To complete the pull request process, please assign thor-wl You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @thor-wl in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[lowang-bh]

/hold

[lowang-bh]

why put your self's blog id here?

[hwdef]

I don't think it's appropriate either.

[daniel-hutao]

why put your self's blog id here?

What's the id? @lowang-bh

[kevin-wangzefeng]

why put your self's blog id here?

What's the id? @lowang-bh

I think you mean this part? @lowang-bh

https://github.com/volcano-sh/website/pull/318/files#diff-8b7ccf455e97b1cd5aa84b772fa0623e5be8322fd8ddde1ce217bb19ae362fb9R29-R31

[volcano-sh-bot]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

[hwdef]

Source code may change frequently, and this kind of article on source code interpretation is not suitable for official documentation website. In fact, many open source projects do not do so.

[kevin-wangzefeng]

Source code may change frequently, and this kind of article on source code interpretation is not suitable for official documentation website. In fact, many open source projects do not do so.

Thanks for raising this concern. As the articles are submitted as blog posts, not document, I think it's fine. But it could have been better if mentioning the code version, e.g. which release tag code is used for the article.