README content for modules - work in M2 Code

[lorikrell]

Topic clarification/correction request

Topic Link

All modules documented in the Open Source and Commerce
of the Module Reference Guide pull the content from the READMEs in Magento 2 code. To add content, create PRs to Magento 2 core!

Solution

We need Modules documented in the Magento 2 source code.
2.4: https://github.com/magento/magento2/tree/2.4-develop/app/code/Magento

• We have a template for you to use: Magento module readme template
• As you add PRs to Magento 2 core, add a link to this issue.
• We can review your PR in Magento 2.
• The merged PRs will be pulled by our doc process, automatically adding content to DevDocs!

[diazwatson]

Hi guys, can I have this assigned to me please?

[jeff-matthews]

@diazwatson, assigned to you. It looks like we still need to provide you with a README template before you can start work.

@dshevtsov, is there a template available?

[diazwatson]

Yes please.
From what I can see Readme files need to be created for all modules in m2 repo, then (once change merged) referenced in these 2 pages. Is this correct?

[jeff-matthews]

Yes, that's correct @diazwatson.

[dshevtsov]

@jeff-matthews, the template is in our internal wiki and has to be published.

[jeff-matthews]

@diazwatson, I attached the template to this comment. GitHub won't accept a Markdown (.md) file attachment, so I changed it to .txt. After you download it, just change the extension to .md.

module-readme-template.txt

[diazwatson]

Thanks for sorting that @jeff-matthews I think I have everything to start

[jeff-matthews]

No problem! Thanks for volunteering to work on this. I also created a public gist of the template: https://gist.github.com/magento-docbot/dfb8cc7db6519da14fc92b890d49b7d3

[keharper]

Make sure any links that point to devdocs contain the proper version in the URL. The template shows links with "2.1".

[jeff-matthews]

Thanks for pointing that out @keharper. I just fixed the gist, but the file attached to my previous comment still has the old 2.1 links.

[dshevtsov]

Seemed like an unintentional closure via a closing keyword.