MDAnalysis documentation style #1
Conversation
|
@orbeckst The docs workflow uploads an artifact of the current build. You can download it from within the actions panel. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overall looks good but we also need the standard footer with notes on privacy for anything served under mdanalysis.org.
Comments
pr_docs/autosummary/mdaencore.html contains the tests, which should be excluded. The overview table should also have text entries for each module although I assume that's for a later PR when you actually look at docs.
pr_docs/autosummary/mdaencore.bootstrap.html shows functions but they are not active links. In general there are issues with functions/methods not resolving. Presumably that can be fixed later, given that this PR is about the style.
The module docs contain "Author" and "new in version 0.16.0" entries that should be removed/consolidated.
| @@ -58,7 +58,6 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| .. bibliography:: | |||
| :filter: False | |||
| :style: MDA | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not shipping the MDA bib style?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This wasn't done in the hole2 kit docs either, trying to keep it consistent between the two packages for when we create a proper extension
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok, references in the hole kit look reasonable (although not as nice in the MDA docs) so I am fine with keeping it simple for right now. Maybe something for a docs extension.
| @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def extensions(debug=False, use_cython=True): | |||
| # TODO: remove fast-math? | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, but that's better done in a separate PR — I totally agree with adding the comment here
|
Is there a RTD doc build on PR that allows one to preview the docs? |
|
The docs are available as build artifacts in actions. |
|
Yeah, but that's so inconvenient that no reviewer will waste time on it. ... so #9 ;-) |
Applied the MDAnalysis documentation style