Documentation #33
Documentation #33
Conversation
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1456670006Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.
Details
💛 - Coveralls |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #33 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 59.95% 59.95%
=======================================
Files 6 6
Lines 412 412
=======================================
Hits 247 247
Misses 165 165
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Not quite sure why it does not publish across forks but here's a preview |
This is a limitation of Documenter + Github (also due to a quite restrictive security model of Github actions). |
|
Maybe we can merge this PR so that doc previews can build? More improvements can be added in separate PRs. It would make previewing changes possible for this repo. |
|
Doc previews will never work for PRs from forks, it's not an issue with setting it up first (but maybe this was clear already). |
|
Right - I wasn't aware of that. Once this PR is merged, future PRs can be created from this repo directly. @FredericWantiez I think you can work from this repo directly, let me know if there is an issue. |
| )..., | ||
| ], | ||
| ], | ||
| checkdocs=:exports, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we could use
| checkdocs=:exports, | |
| strict=true, | |
| checkdocs=:exports, |
to ensure that an error is thrown and the action fails if something fails or e.g. is not documented. Otherwise one always has to check the logs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, missed that. Yes let's fail instead
| with: | ||
| token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} | ||
|
|
||
| ssh: ${{ secrets.DOCUMENTER_KEY }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was the key and corresponding secret added to the repo?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, generated a new pair and added it. I don't think we have keys at the organization level ?
README.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### Installation | ||
|
|
||
| Inside the julia REPL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIRC the convention is to use uppercase for the language and lowercase only for the binary:
| Inside the julia REPL | |
| Inside the Julia REPL |
README.md
Outdated
| [](https://coveralls.io/github/TuringLang/AdvancedPS.jl?branch=master) | ||
| [](https://github.com/invenia/BlueStyle) | ||
|
|
||
| AdvancedPS provides and efficient implementation of common particle based Monte Carlo samplers using the [AbstractMCMC](https://github.com/TuringLang/AbstractMCMC.jl) interface. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| AdvancedPS provides and efficient implementation of common particle based Monte Carlo samplers using the [AbstractMCMC](https://github.com/TuringLang/AbstractMCMC.jl) interface. | |
| AdvancedPS provides an efficient implementation of common particle based Monte Carlo samplers using the [AbstractMCMC](https://github.com/TuringLang/AbstractMCMC.jl) interface. |
Maybe also mention Libtask (until it is replaced)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, seems like Libtask is always the pain point when people look at AdvancedPS
docs/make.jl
Outdated
| # Print `@debug` statements (https://github.com/JuliaDocs/Documenter.jl/issues/955) | ||
| if haskey(ENV, "GITHUB_ACTIONS") | ||
| ENV["JULIA_DEBUG"] = "Documenter" | ||
| end | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's set in the action already:
| # Print `@debug` statements (https://github.com/JuliaDocs/Documenter.jl/issues/955) | |
| if haskey(ENV, "GITHUB_ACTIONS") | |
| ENV["JULIA_DEBUG"] = "Documenter" | |
| end |
|
@yebai agree, let's get the scaffolding in and I'll move away from my forks |
Adding doc and examples workflow to the repo. Also a basic writeup for the API.
The examples are still to-do