Skip to content
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

Clearly document usage of internal files #548

Closed
1 of 4 tasks
abelsromero opened this issue Jul 25, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed
1 of 4 tasks

Clearly document usage of internal files #548

abelsromero opened this issue Jul 25, 2021 · 3 comments

Comments

@abelsromero
Copy link
Member

Thank you for taking your time to talk with us!

What is this issue about?

  • Bug report
  • Feature request
  • Question
  • Documentation

Description
Usage of internal files (prefixed with _) can be better exposed in the docs.
Current explanation in a simple admonition that can pass unnoticed. As suggested in #545 (comment) it's much better if have an specific section.

That means either putting this information in the preamble, or a section above "Setup" 
named "How files are processed". There, it can say that this plugin looks for all AsciiDoc 
files in the specified directory, but ignores files that are considered non-public, such
 as internal include files and hidden files.

This section can be set in a partial file to be reused for all goals.

For clarification: current behaviour was inherited from AsciidoctorJ https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctorj/blob/main/asciidoctorj-core/src/main/java/org/asciidoctor/jruby/AsciiDocDirectoryWalker.java.

@abelsromero
Copy link
Member Author

Another thing to add is to also document and test that files with "." prefix are also not processed.

@abelsromero
Copy link
Member Author

Replaced by #549

@mojavelinux
Copy link
Member

Oops. I didn't realize you had filed an issue too. Sorry for not checking first.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants