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
Merge nbconvert into IPython #3500
Conversation
allow nonexistent output
filters. Filter is now dependent on env. type.
(see template.py)
of the template.
Added more comments and header comments.
Instead of the horizantal rule following the target via a minipage, the needspace package is used. This frees the need to preprocess the target block using the sphinxtransformer. This allows us to rely on Jinja more, as intended by nbconvert. Fixed some macro names to stay PEP8 consistent. Removed an unnecessary comment. Unified the output type blocks into the render_output macro.
Centeralized some code into methods Added more comments
This reverts part of commit 994bca5.
Small images were getting streched to larger scales.
Re-posting my own note from #3497:
I think it should be a subcommand. I would like to eventually get rid of all top-level commands (ipengine, ipcontroller, etc.), so I don't think we should ever add new top-level scripts. We haven't had an official conversation on this matter, though. |
Also: woo! |
Ok I see how you did this, thanks for doing it the right way. |
Looks like you missed by last two commits - the ones that fixed the Travis run. |
ok, they weren't there when I merged. Will cherry pick. |
Scratch that, they were just after the first comments. Should be in now. |
OK our Travis build is passing again. Only one more thing to figure out: do we want to |
I don't have strong feelings on nbconvert vs convert - maybe 51% in favor of just convert? |
I sort of preferred nbconvert for being more explicit, but when I really think about it, it's hard to imagine |
I think the main question if if |
That's what I was thinking, and honestly from that perspective, I don't see a problem with plain |
Though if we really want to remain future-proof, the |
I too am just about 50/50...makes it a bit tough to decide. Another reason On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Fernando Perez
Brian E. Granger |
@ellisonbg don't worry about me, I can continue to work on the tests on my machine even though this isn't merged yet. The tests aren't really coupled in a way that would make them break significantly when moved to ipy (just references, easy fix). |
@jdfreder and I talked about the name of the subcommand. Both of us feel that using |
Thanks a lot everyone, I would really like to be able to participate more, but those day I really can't. |
Great! I just landed a few hours ago and it was already merged... great again! Good job! Cheers. |
Merge nbconvert into IPython
Supersedes PR #3497. This PR merges the actual repo, and is made from the IPython org so all core devs can finish it up.
This pull request takes the nbconvert package and inserts into the main IPython project as
IPython.nbconvert
. Whilenbconvert
is not done, we need to get it merged ASAP so continue the work. In addition to the code dump I have made some basic changes:nbconvert
sub-command ofipython
so users can doipython nbconvert
.I will try to get the Travis tests to pass (mostly import issues), but this code does not have tests. These will be added in a future PR that @jdfreder has already started on. One question we should figure out before merging:
nbconvert
or the simplerconvert
?