Process #1
Labels
No Label
Kind/Breaking
Kind/Bug
Kind/Documentation
Kind/Enhancement
Kind/Feature
Kind/Security
Kind/Testing
Priority
Critical
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Reviewed
Confirmed
Reviewed
Duplicate
Reviewed
Invalid
Reviewed
Won't Fix
Status
Abandoned
Status
Blocked
Status
Need More Info
No Milestone
No Assignees
4 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: gitea/gitea-docusaurus#1
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
We need to figure out a sustainable process for this new documentation.
a. the lowest hanging fruit for contributions, yet
b. one of the least contributed-to facets of a project
My initial thought is to convert all the docs in the main repo to simple markdown files (with frontmatter, presumably), or more simply something that you could theoretically copy/paste into docusaurus and it would "just work" assuming the config is set up correctly here.
I by no means have this all the way thought out, so feedback is very welcome!
A agree with your assessment re: reasons to keep docs in the main repo, hence why I have the CI converting the docs from the main repo into a format acceptable by docusaurus.
This approach means that we can, in the future, have tea cli, act_runner, and other related tools have docs in their specific repo, and then pull them all together into this one site. Additionally, we can still keep the docs in a hugo acceptable format and build/bundle the docs on gitea build/release.
I hadn't thought of adding docs from other repos, but that would also be great!
wrt hugo-compatible, the reason I wanted to start this discussion was to figure out whether we wanted to deal with all of the idiosyncrasies of Hugo and Docusaurus vs simplifying the Docu ingestion process and going all-in.
The shell scripts here work (and again a huge thank you for that), so there's certainly no rush, but would it be easier to maintain if we no longer had to worry about Hugo at all?
I don't think we need always to keep compatible with hugo. I mean, once the new docs site ready, we can change main repositories docs as a docusaurus folder directly. Since docusaurus supports mono repos, so it's a good idea to merge all documentation as in one. But we need to consider about the webhooks. How to and when update this docs site?
Docs need to stay in the main repo. I wouldn't actually mind also having docasaurus there, replacing hugo eventually.
Ongoing with this topic, I propose that once a version has been released (or after we drop official support?), we move the docs from that branch to this repo directly.
It means less cloning, and theoretically nothing much should change from that point on for that version of the docs.
Plus, if we ever have to do a larger refactor, it will be easier than a state where version X had X layout, version Y has Y layout, etc. as we continue to evolve the docs.
Note that I'm referring to the main repo, auxiliary repo docs probably don't need the same treatment.
But the event is difficult to catch?
Moving the above to #54, this can be closed with #51