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

Ordering of items in Reference/API sections (esp. astropy.units) #15877

Open
mhvk opened this issue Jan 12, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Ordering of items in Reference/API sections (esp. astropy.units) #15877

mhvk opened this issue Jan 12, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@mhvk
Copy link
Contributor

mhvk commented Jan 12, 2024

What is the problem this feature will solve?

The reference/API section for some subpackages can be quite long - e.g., astropy.units has several dozen functions and classes (see https://docs.astropy.org/en/stable/units/ref_api.html). Hence, order matters to find something. On stable, order is alphabetical, but on dev it has become by alphabetical by submodule things are imported from, because that is how __all__ is defined (which was introduced by #15862).

The question now is what to do. Options:

  1. Sort __all__ and always make things alphabetical
  2. Somehow introduce headings between items. This would have the benefit that it would make it unnecessary to also display, e.g., the contents of astropy.units.equivalencies. But might also make things less findable.
  3. Other?

Describe the desired outcome

A clean reference/API page without needless duplication.

I put a milestone here since I think we should decide on some ordering before we release the next stable docs (reverting to sorted alphabetically if we cannot think of something better).

Additional context

No response

@pllim
Copy link
Member

pllim commented May 6, 2024

Is this resolved? I am removing the milestone since v6.1.0 has happened and we usually do not milestone issue unless it is a release blocker. Thanks!

@pllim pllim removed this from the v6.1.0 milestone May 6, 2024
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