Skip to content
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

💥Refactor the document structure #338

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 5, 2022
Merged

💥Refactor the document structure #338

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 5, 2022

Conversation

seng1e
Copy link
Contributor

@seng1e seng1e commented Jul 3, 2022

This commit have lots of changes about document structure as follow:

  1. Re-arranged doc structure according to the structure in the project application.
  2. Modify the names of many files according to the characteristics of the document, but the content roughly the same.
  3. Removed and merged some useless files and duplicate documents.
  4. A temporary interface has been written for the reference module, which may be removed and rewritten later.(this part in docs/api folder, you can ignore it for a while)

@seng1e seng1e requested a review from a team as a code owner July 3, 2022 17:49
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Jul 3, 2022

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 3, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #338 (e65a98d) into master (30ce0a0) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #338   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   41.13%   41.13%           
=======================================
  Files          27       27           
  Lines        1928     1928           
=======================================
  Hits          793      793           
  Misses       1135     1135           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 41.13% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

@wj-Mcat
Copy link
Collaborator

wj-Mcat commented Jul 4, 2022

Your pr is so great and contains so many works which need some time to read it. I will reply as soon as possible, and In this period, you can do some research on: merging the docs of python-wechaty and python-wechaty-plugin-contrib. Please feel free to tell me more if you have any cons.

Copy link
Collaborator

@wj-Mcat wj-Mcat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Your docs is great.

Comment on lines -42 to 63
* [.find_all\(\)](message.md#Message.findAll) ⇒ `List[Message]`
* [.find_all\(\)](message.md#Message.findAll) ⇒ `List[Message]` -->


### ~~def from\(self\)~~ ⇒ `Contact`
<!-- ### ~~def from\(self\)~~ ⇒ `Contact`

已弃用, 详见[message.talker\(\)](message.md#Message+talker)
已弃用, 详见[message.talker\(\)](message.md#Message+talker) -->

### def talker\(self\) ⇒ `Contact`
<!-- ### def talker\(self\) ⇒ `Contact`

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This desc style is from source of typescript, we should change it to mkdocs style, the same as the api module. How do you think about it?

this desc looks weired.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, I found that many of the documentation descriptions were lifted directly from the typescript section, and these codes should be rewritten by python.
And I will rewrite the corresponding section later when I write this part of the document.

@wj-Mcat wj-Mcat merged commit 3227824 into wechaty:master Jul 5, 2022
@wj-Mcat
Copy link
Collaborator

wj-Mcat commented Jul 5, 2022

Wechaty Contributors Nomination

Link to wechaty/PMC#16

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants