-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Documentation infrastructure. #262
Conversation
docs/README.md
Outdated
The `docs` directory in the pyscript repository contains | ||
[Sphinx](https://www.sphinx-doc.org/) documentation project, which is a system | ||
to take a plaintext files containing the documentation written in Markdown | ||
and static files such as templates and themes to build the static end result. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Minor adjustments. The phrase "such as templates and themes" could alternatively be between commas or parentheses:
The docs
directory in the pyscript repository contains the
Sphinx documentation project, a system for publishing static files—such as templates and themes—and plaintext files written in markdown.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ooh, yes, the em dashes read better.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did a slightly different rewrite. Let me know what you think once I push my changes.
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ | |||
# Maintainers | |||
|
|||
This document lists the Maintainers of the Project. Maintainers may be added once approved by the existing maintainers as described in the [Governance document](policy.md). By adding your name to this list you are agreeing to abide by the Project governance documents and to abide by all of the Organization's polices, including the [code of conduct](https://github.com/pyscript/governance/blob/main/CODE-OF-CONDUCT.md), [trademark policy](https://github.com/pyscript/governance/blob/main/TRADEMARKS.md), and [antitrust policy](https://github.com/pyscript/governance/blob/main/TRADEMARKS.md). If you are participating because of your affiliation with another organization (designated below), you represent that you have the authority to bind that organization to these policies. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"represent" isn't really working grammatically here, though I understand the goal of it... perhaps:
"... you authorize the binding of that organization to these policies."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since @kevingoldsmith put all these governance docs together, I'd like his input on that change before we make it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
represent comes from the original github document. It is meant to be legalese. I wouldn't change it if it is a bit janky but the meaning is clear.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Copy that, thanks Kevin.
@fpliger @jezdez I also did some general edits and replaced the Lorem Ipsum with some "Coming Soon" text anywhere it was needed. Idan, Albert, and I added some content to the Concepts folder to attempt to give a big picture explanation of PyScript. It still needs work, but is at least mergeable, if y'all are okay with the language. |
LGTM... Nice work. Merge conflict to look into. Py-script is delivering Python 3.10 but several of these GHAs use Py3.9. There might be plenty of good reasons for this dichotomy but it might lead to issues. There is probably some the thought to be given to "There is no setup" vs. docs/tutorials/setup.md |
Good callout, let's fix the Python version difference, no good reason for it IIRC.
Huh, fascinating, while I like the messaging of "there is no setup", a tutorial would probably require a user to setup a development environment, to make sure they can actually edit a HTML file and use PyScript. That's worth doing to engage with beginners that will look for ways to start using PyScript. I wonder if we could look at "web development" tutorials out there (MDN?) and get inspiration. |
This does a few things: - Adds some placeholders following the Diátaxis framework (https://diataxis.fr) - Sets up Sphinx with MyST parser for Markdown in addition to rST. - Uses the well-known PyData Sphinx theme. - Moves some already existing Markdown files into the docs directory. - Sets up the initial doc review GitHub action to auto-deploy to GitHub pages.
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
The existing trigger is apparently not in the GHA spec
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
@fpliger So generally speaking, it would be interesting to understand what would be a good level at which we should do a review and merge of this PR? This is still just a skeleton in terms of content and design, but it might be worth merging to allow smaller content/design PRs to happen. https://docs.pyscript.net/review/262/ is the current build of this PR (as will all PRs automatically trigger such a review build). |
@jezdez totally agree. This became too big of a catch all PR. If you are 👍 I'd say, I can review and merge this and the allow for other smaller (and more digestible) PR to follow. Sounds good to you? |
Sounds good to me! Thank you <3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
generally looks ok, but I'm concerned about making some of the governance documents undiscoverable. I think they make more sense at the project level than buried in the docs. If we want them in the docs we can either reference them at the room, link to them or rephrase them.
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ | |||
# Maintainers |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure we should be burying these files.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm +1 on bumping it for governance. In my mind, it's a "special" concept that we want to give big priority.
On a different note, it'd be great if we could link/pull these directly from the governance repo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, good point @kevingoldsmith, I'll move them back and use a symlink to have the real files in the root of the repo, but also render them on the docs site (we can make a editorial decision if we want to keep them separately).
@fpliger FWIW this structure was recommended by the MVG, to have some files in the project repo, and some on the org level. So if we were to add additional projects to the pyscript organization, they would require also at least a MAINTAINERS.md
and GOVERNANCE.md
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wow.. this is an AMAZING starting point!! It'd be +100 on merging this right now.
On a quick chat with @jezdez we agreed that it makes sense to add something like "THIS IS A PLACEHOLDER FOR THE DOCUMENTATION, DO NOT USE IT AS A REFERENCE YET" to the front page until we add meaningful content.
Will merge as soon as it lands :)
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ | |||
# Maintainers |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm +1 on bumping it for governance. In my mind, it's a "special" concept that we want to give big priority.
On a different note, it'd be great if we could link/pull these directly from the governance repo.
- * | ||
# Any time a tag or branch is created | ||
# https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#create | ||
create: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mattkram You're right, this was written wrong, should have been on: push: tags:
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ | |||
# Maintainers |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, good point @kevingoldsmith, I'll move them back and use a symlink to have the real files in the root of the repo, but also render them on the docs site (we can make a editorial decision if we want to keep them separately).
@fpliger FWIW this structure was recommended by the MVG, to have some files in the project repo, and some on the org level. So if we were to add additional projects to the pyscript organization, they would require also at least a MAINTAINERS.md
and GOVERNANCE.md
.
docs/conf.py
Outdated
# -- Project information ----------------------------------------------------- | ||
|
||
project = "PyScript" | ||
copyright = "2022, PyScript contributors" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kevingoldsmith Is that copyright line correct?
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
../../../MAINTAINERS.md |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kevingoldsmith Reverted to just symlink to the root of the repo, while still rendering them in the docs.
@fpliger I've addressed @kevingoldsmith's comments and add the note, does that work? |
When the PR is merged, I'll open new issues for the TODO items above left undone. I think the are fine to work on after the fact. |
Imo, that works great! I'm +1 on merging this as is and opening issues/PRs for the remaining items /comments (there's a lot of value here that others can build on top of). @kevingoldsmith does that work for you or do you have any reservations? |
Thank you for the great work on this @jezdez @ximena9201 @kathatherine @idanenglander and everyone involved! |
This does a few things:
Deployment (like ReadTheDocs)
Eventually we need three different types of deployments:
docs.pyscript.net/review/<pr-number>/
)docs.pyscript.net/<tag>/
)docs.pyscript.net/latest/
)Refs #167 and #168.
Known issues