feat: New Project page

[mpabarca]

Description

Create project button on sidebar header that link to page on shape-docs that helps on the creation of a new openapi repository on github following this guidance and this base url:

https://github.com/new?name={...}&description={...}&template_owner={...}&template_name={...}

Motivation and Context

Screenshots:

V3

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

[simonbs]

AWESOME!! 🚀 I'm on vacation now but will make sure to go through the changes once I'm back on Monday.

[simonbs]

I added a couple of comments to the files. Below are a few more general questions 😊

Is the highlighted text off by one character?

I love the highlighted text feature—such a fun touch! It seems like the highlight is consistently one character too long, though. I’ve pointed this out in the screenshot below. Is there an easy way to adjust that?

Should we reduce the number of documentation links?

Linking to the documentation is a great idea. However, the multiple "(?)" links might add a bit of clutter and make it seem like there’s a lot more to read than necessary. Would it be enough to just have the "Read more about Adding Documentation to Shape Docs" link at the bottom?

Can we link the user to the project?

Wouldn’t it be cool if step four linked directly to the documentation on Shape Docs? Since the user enters the project name, we could use that to generate the URL. Maybe we show the link after the "Create Repository" button is clicked? We could eventually have it poll the project list to confirm creation, but I don’t think that’s needed right away.

[simonbs]

Should we reduce the number of documentation links?

Linking to the documentation is a great idea. However, the multiple "(?)" links might add a bit of clutter and make it seem like there’s a lot more to read than necessary. Would it be enough to just have the "Read more about Adding Documentation to Shape Docs" link at the bottom?

Looking at it again, removing these links would also eliminate another challenge, albeit a small one. The links behind the "(?)" buttons currently assume that the HELP_URL environment variable points to our wiki, or at least to a website with the exact same subpages. However, that's not the case. Anyone deploying Shape Docs is free to provide a HELP_URL that points to any internal documentation.

[mpabarca]

Should we reduce the number of documentation links?
Linking to the documentation is a great idea. However, the multiple "(?)" links might add a bit of clutter and make it seem like there’s a lot more to read than necessary. Would it be enough to just have the "Read more about Adding Documentation to Shape Docs" link at the bottom?

Looking at it again, removing these links would also eliminate another challenge, albeit a small one. The links behind the "(?)" buttons currently assume that the HELP_URL environment variable points to our wiki, or at least to a website with the exact same subpages. However, that's not the case. Anyone deploying Shape Docs is free to provide a HELP_URL that points to any internal documentation.

@simonbs completely right. I had considered this issue before but thought the value provided was more important than future-proofing. However, after getting a second opinion, I agree—it didn’t add much value, so it’s better to remove them.

[mpabarca]

Can we link the user to the project?

Wouldn’t it be cool if step four linked directly to the documentation on Shape Docs? Since the user enters the project name, we could use that to generate the URL. Maybe we show the link after the "Create Repository" button is clicked? We could eventually have it poll the project list to confirm creation, but I don’t think that’s needed right away.

@simonbs This would be awesome! However, we might encounter an issue when adding this feature: determining the repository owner.

To redirect, we would use this format: https://github.com/{owner}/{project-name}

Initially, we could assume that the owner could be inferred from the template key, e.g., NEW_PROJECT_TEMPLATE_REPOSITORY=shapehq/starter-openapi, but I’m not sure this would work for all future scenarios. If I’m wrong, please let me know—or if you see another way to reliably get the owner.

Another scenario to consider is that the user might change the project name on GitHub without us knowing. This could result in redirecting to the wrong or a non-existent repository.

[simonbs]

@simonbs This would be awesome! However, we might encounter an issue when adding this feature: determining the repository owner.

Right, that's a good point. I did not think of that. Let's abandon this idea for now.

[simonbs]

Yay! Let's get this merged in 🚀🙌