Establish publishing progression

[kcopas]

Maintaining draft or review documents in a labs URL makes sense, but once they are complete, we should have a stable, consistent location for the approved HTML versions, like docs.gbif.org or similar.

That URL—and not the GitHub repo—should then serve as the DOI reference, since it (should) provides access to all secondary versions, including PDFs and/or translations.

Propose that we review the update to the effective nodes guidance with @melianieraymond next week with an eye toward making it the first approved documentation residing in its proper place.

[MattBlissett]

One way to achieve this:

• Make Git branches for each version, e.g. 1.0, 2.0. (Set GitHub to show the currently-in-development version, e.g. 2.0).
• Use the branch names as part of the URL, so https://labs.gbif.org/documents/test-document/1.0/ and https://labs.gbif.org/documents/test-document/2.0/
• I'd need something to redirect https://labs.gbif.org/documents/test-document/ to the highest version (not necessarily the most recently changed).

• These are branches (not tags), to allow for small corrections to be made to old versions.
• I configured test-document to build to labs for all branches. We could build to production only when a release is done, or a tag.

Would you prefer docs.gbif.org or documents.gbif.org, or something else?

[kcopas]

This sounds like a promising, orderly process (I knew you'd know).

Just checked with @laurarussell, @dnoesgaard & @timhirsch — we're in the tank for docs.gbif.org.

[MattBlissett]

This is implemented, except for having something to redirect to the latest version. I've set the versions to 1.0, but it could equally well be something like "2006".

The documents in development are at https://docs.gbif-uat.org/ .