-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 43
[WIP][APT-1673] Update regenerate scripts #155
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Won't these two lines need to update in accordance with the
docs-sourcerparameter adjustment? Something like…There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or: maybe there's only…
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Forgive me, Ore, as I propose yet a third option. I'll add a little more context this time so you can follow my reasoning. While this all boils down to choosing the appropriate switches and defaults, that feels important to me because which we choose help to suggest the expected pattern of use, which makes it a UX concern.
In a standalone context, the tool is responsible for running a set of plugins in order to generate a docs site from various sources. The same can be said when running the tool in our cloud service — it's concerned with everything. For this reason, I think I may have misled in suggesting the need for a
--allin the first place. That should probably be the default for thedocs-sourceritself.In the context of the docs site, where we leverage yarn, it's more likely that a user will want to do local-only regeneration, to view content they just edited. That's even more true in the long run, when the cloud process will manage changes to remote content automatically. There are still use cases for running remote generation in the docs repo manually, but they seem secondary.
For these reasons, I would propose that the
docs-sourcercommand runs all plugins by default, and accepts the--pluginand--repoarguments as a way to filter that to specific plugins. I'd then propose one of two options for the docs site itselfOPTION 1: Closest to standard usage, with just a shortcut for local generation as a convenience:
OPTION 2: Emphasizing the appropriate default for the context, at the risk of essentially reversing the default:
Thoughts?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I will revert to the default command running all plugins.
I am also leaning towards option 2 in the context of the docs repo. It is trivial to change so we test out any and switch if needed.
@eak12913 thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Upon reflection, I like option 2 best also. I think it reflects the pattern of use better, and no one but us will care that it follows a different pattern than the underlying
docs-sourcertool itself.