Revamp the README #601
Revamp the README #601
Conversation
* Add Table of Contents * Update the main screenshot to show app in v. 2.2.0, * Remove info about the outdated packages, Docker image, contact methods, * Move the too long and mostly outdated anyway production setup docs into a separate file, * Shorten and deduplicate, * Unify the method of header formatting, * Break long lines. * Point to camptocamp's Docker image - it's maintained and the provider is trusted, Fixes #554, #574 (sort of) and #579.
|
Instead of reading through the diff of this PR I suggest going through the new README using the Github markdown viewer, here: https://github.com/gdubicki/puppetboard/tree/update_readme . |
|
@alexjfisher : can I get an approval please? If we find any issues in the README after the merge I will be happy to work on it more until it’s perfect. I really like this app and would like it to get more attention. :) |
|
Please ping me if you need anything else from me to get this merged. Thanks! |
| @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ | |||
| pep8 | |||
| coverage | |||
| mock | |||
| pytest >=4.6 | |||
| pytest >=4.6,<6 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As I have written in the commit message of this change: because our tests are incompatible with Pytest 6. Perhaps I should have elaborated on that more, let me do that here. :)
I have squashed my commits so you won't find the link to a failed test in this PR, but after a while of digging in travis-ci.org/github/voxpupuli/puppetboard I found it here: https://travis-ci.org/github/voxpupuli/puppetboard/builds/755852596
In the output we have:
________________________ ERROR collecting test session _________________________
Direct construction of Pep8Item has been deprecated, please use Pep8Item.from_parent.
See https://docs.pytest.org/en/stable/deprecations.html#node-construction-changed-to-node-from-parent for more details.
...which, as explained under that URL, is something that:
[has] Changed in version 6.0. [of Pytest]
I would prefer to not update the tests for Pytest 6 in this PR. Firstly it is out of its scope. Secondly I am afraid that starting to work on in here would delay merging this PR to a point where it will start to be out of date or have to resolve conflicts that will arise.
into a separate file,
+
Fixes #554, #574 (sort of) and #579.