[CONTENT SPRINT] Build a Governed Databricks Workspace with Pulumi#18960
[CONTENT SPRINT] Build a Governed Databricks Workspace with Pulumi#18960sicarul wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
Docs review (CI) Thanks for the post! Issues to address before publish. Line numbers refer to 1. Scope mismatch. The intro, the "What you will build" list (lines 30-33), 2. Cloud claim does not match the example. Line 41 frames the workspace-resource layer as cross-cloud, but the example is Azure-only: line 55 uses an Azure Databricks host ( 3. Link in H2 heading (line 46). 4. Conclusion is too thin and missing a CTA (lines 155-157). Two generic sentences with no specific next step. Add a topical CTA linking to the Databricks provider page on the Pulumi Registry, the ESC docs, or a Get Started link, using the blog/cta-button shortcode. 5. "Pulumi Stacks" should be lowercase (line 141). Per AGENTS.md, use lowercase for non-proper nouns ("stack", not "Stack"). Change to 6. Consecutive paragraphs start with "By" (lines 139 and 141). Repetitive-sentence-opener pattern flagged in the blog review criteria. Vary the rhythm or merge the two paragraphs. 7. Hedging language. Line 20 "often find themselves manually configuring" - drop "often". Line 41 "This is typically cloud-specific" - tighten to "These resources are cloud-specific". 8. First-mention links missing. Line 20 - first mention of Databricks (https://www.databricks.com/) should be hyperlinked. Line 42 - first mention of Frontmatter and publishing readiness
End-of-review publishing readiness checklist
Mention @claude for another pass after revisions, or if you would like me to draft the missing |
Social Media Reviewcontent/blog/end-to-end-databricks-with-pulumi/index.mdX — PASSLinkedIn — PASSBluesky — PASSSuggestions (advisory)These are stylistic notes — they don't block the post. X
Updated for commit |
|
Your site preview for commit 545a40a is ready! 🎉 http://www-testing-pulumi-docs-origin-pr-18960-545a40a7.s3-website.us-west-2.amazonaws.com |
Lighthouse Performance ReportCommit: b51b598 | Metric definitions
|
b51b598 to
5c53bfa
Compare
5c53bfa to
45d704b
Compare
|
@claude please review again. I rewrote this branch history to a single clean commit on current |
|
Claude finished @sicarul's task in 1m 58s —— View job Docs review (CI) — re-reviewThanks for the cleanup pass. The branch is now a single clean commit touching exactly the three blog files ( Fixed
Still outstanding
Frontmatter and publishing readiness
End-of-review publishing readiness checklist
Net: structural and stylistic issues from the prior pass are largely resolved. The remaining content gaps (X copy, two hedges, missing provider link, optional CTA shortcode) are small fixes. The publish blocker is still the final Mention @claude for another pass after revisions. |
|
@claude please review again. Branch history is now a single clean commit on current origin/master. The PR diff contains only content/blog/end-to-end-databricks-with-pulumi/index.md plus feature.png and meta.png. Social-review is passing, and actionable content feedback has been addressed. |
|
Claude finished @sicarul's task in 1m 17s —— View job Docs review (CI) — third passConfirmed: the branch is a single clean commit on top of current For the content items from the prior pass, I walked through the current Still outstanding (carried over from pass 2)
Note: per the prior pass, the body scope (cluster policies, notebooks, jobs), the H2 link removal, "Pulumi stacks" casing, repeated "By" openers, Azure-only framing, and the Databricks first-mention link are all confirmed fixed in this commit. Frontmatter and publishing readiness
End-of-review publishing readiness checklist
Net: branch is in great shape structurally, but the four small content fixes I flagged in pass 2 (X copy, two hedges, missing provider link, optional CTA shortcode) don't appear in this commit. They're a few minutes of edits. Want me to push those changes directly? Just reply |
|
@claude please review again. This request is after the latest pushed head commit |
|
Claude finished @sicarul's task in 1m 24s —— View job Docs review (CI) — fourth passThe branch head is still However, no content edits have landed since pass 3 ( Still outstanding (carried over from pass 3, unchanged)
Verified by Confirmed still good from pass 3
End-of-review publishing readiness checklist
Net: branch hygiene is solid, but the four small content fixes from pass 3 don't appear in this commit (HEAD is unchanged). They're a few minutes of edits — I'm happy to apply them on this branch. Reply with |
|
@claude please review again. This PR is now marked as draft, the needs-design label has been removed, and the latest pushed head is |
|
Claude finished @sicarul's task in 1m 8s —— View job Docs review (CI) — fifth passBranch hygiene at Still outstanding (unchanged from pass 4)
Confirmed still good from pass 4
On the draft / Marking the PR as draft and removing End-of-review publishing readiness checklist
Net: branch hygiene remains solid, but no content edits have landed since pass 2 — items 1–4 are unchanged. They are a few minutes of work; happy to push them on this branch myself. Reply • Branch: |
45d704b to
545a40a
Compare
|
@claude please review the latest pushed changes, including the generated blog feature and meta images. |
|
Claude finished @sicarul's task in 1m 41s —— View job Docs review (CI) — sixth passBranch hygiene at Images — big change since pass 5 ✅ The placeholder PNGs have been replaced by properly generated assets:
I inspected both files visually:
These are the standard generated outputs from the blog feature/meta image pipeline and look ready to ship as the final assets. The Content items 1–4 — still unchanged Since pass 5 the
Confirmed still good from pass 5
End-of-review publishing readiness checklist
Net: the meta image is now the real, generated 1200×628 OG asset with the proper title and current Pulumi branding — that flips the only hard publish blocker from pass 5. The four content items from passes 2–5 are unchanged in this commit. They are a few minutes of edits; reply |
Why this content is interesting
What we took into account
Why it is useful to an end user
Design need
needs-designbecause the post needs a final meta image before publication.feature.pngandmeta.pngfiles are placeholders unless Design chooses to reuse or adapt them.Metadata
🤖 Generated with OpenCode