README is broken on NPM

[kettanaito]

What:

NPM states that atomic-layout package doesn't have a README.

Why:

Due to the monorepo structure.

Environment:

• atomic-layout version: 0.12.3

Steps to reproduce:

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Go to https://www.npmjs.com/package/atomic-layout
2. See the following message instead of README:

"Unable to find a readme for atomic-layout@0.12.3"

Expected behavior:

atomic-layout package on NPM displays the current README from the repository.

Screenshots:

[ruhaise]

@kettanaito i think to solve this we should have a copy of README.md in https://github.com/kettanaito/atomic-layout/tree/master/packages/atomic-layout as well, is it correct ?

[kettanaito]

Perhaps, let's see if we can achieve that with symlinks? NPM should support that.

[ruhaise]

@kettanaito this seems fixed the issue, but I'm still not sure if this is the correct approach?
now the README.md is moved to the packages/atomic-layout then i have added a symlink from it to the root of repository just for GitHub, now the npm will find theREADME.md from the package

[kettanaito]

@ruhaise We need to make sure the root-level README is not broken on GitHub. I think we should preserve the root-level and symlink it to packages/atomic-layout. Would that work in your opinion?

[ruhaise]

@kettanaito that should work as well, atleast in github im sure, but im not sure about npm, i did some research and was not able to find any proper documentaion about it

[ruhaise]

@kettanaito I have pushed the changes as you proposed, but i have no clue how to test this on NPM without publishing

[kettanaito]

Thanks for the update! Looks much better.

If you open the packages/atomic-layout you can see that the symlinked README has broken images. That is because the paths to the assets are relative to the root directory. This one is an interesting to solve. I'd suggest looking to other monorepo packages and how they handle README in their repository.

[ruhaise]

@kettanaito I made the broken links from relative to absolute this seems fixed the issue, but I'm not sure if this is the right way. did a bit of research and couldn't find a better solution.

[ruhaise]

@kettanaito what is the status of this issue? seems like the PR fixed it right?

[kettanaito]

@ruhaise, I believe so. Sorry, I've been busy with other tasks and haven't looked at your pull request in the full extent. Will do so in the nearest future. Thank you once more for contributing!