Bringing back Launch Revamp (focused on reference material of CLI and Core library and development guide) #61
Conversation
|
@CryptoTotalWar PR spec should be implementation oriented, while issue spec should be requirements oriented. The tasks above are a bit bare, while the issue spec is too much. |
|
Summary of I encountered persistent ESLint configuration issues that appear to stem from settings in the Problems in
These ESLint flags are primarily about maintaining consistent coding styles and formatting for better readability and maintainability. However, they do not impact the actual performance or functionality of the documentation site. |
|
The |
|
When linting, just do |
I did and it seemed to have auto fixed those minor issues but the problem messages were not disappearing. I guess we just ignore this. Anyway @CMCDragonkai let me know once you've had a chance to review this PR or if you would like for me to hop online so we can review together. |
|
Some problem messages require a manual fix. In those cases the program just tells you what the problem is. Some things can be autofixed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is for all the reference material under polykey-core.
So the basic idea here is that we wouldn't want to replicate everything that gets autogenerated by the docs generator npm run docs such as in https://github.com/MatrixAI/Polykey/tree/staging/docs (https://matrixai.github.io/Polykey/).
So as this is a "human maintained" reference we should:
- ALWAYS link to the autogenerated docs like https://matrixai.github.io/Polykey/modules/gestalts.html for the gestalts domain
- Then focus on only the human understood reference
For 2., I believe we should focus on these things in order:
- Important Types and Data structures
- Important Objects and Classes
- Important Architecture
Remember the important thing is to focus on "usage" - not on internal details. The docs should then be read by someone intending to use the gestalts domain of Polykey core, not necessarily the developer of the gestalts domain. Cause that way we can separate external API requirements from internal implementation details. And if we avoid specifying too much details, we also avoid having to always change this if we change implementation stuff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Need to check/compare with the latest deployed version for reference-polykey-core. I think the version i copied over from the feature-launch-revamp branch a bit brittle or outdates as you said.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There were some substantial changes made for some of the reference material under polykey-core.
So what i want to do is the following:
#1 - Verify that the incoming changes are better than what was already there (which what is currently live too) - @CMCDragonkai
#2 - after this i can compare the reference material under polykey-core. with the autogenerated docs material to evaluate duplicate information and retain more high-level information
There was a problem hiding this comment.
actually i just saw the comparison for gestalts and i think i understand much better what you were saying and i think i know how to action and edit this now... once i make the Push fixing this i will ask you to review for confirmation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for adding the link to the autogenerated docs for each of the pages i created this issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we need a separate issue for this. This is too simple. It would taken less time to just do it.
|
I'm going to comment about implementation problems here. Regarding:
You ticked this off in #52 (comment) but where is this? I don't see any images extracted from excalidraw? |
CMCDragonkai
changed the title
|
Title of PR was renamed to focus on implementation. |
|
What happened to these files?
|
So is the solution required here to delete the .npmrc file all together? |
These were files that were already included in the latest PR. So i checkmarked them. Should have been more explicit about this. |
That's because i noticed that the excalidraw docs in question were already included. |
Remove it from this PR. |
But were they any different? Did you check the diff? |
From my understanding, synthesising information from excalidraw is to extract out subsections and put them into the docs directly, not as just uploading the file to the |
|
@CryptoTotalWar can you address my review comments above asap starting from here: #61 (review). I want to have this merged before EOD. |
CMCDragonkai
force-pushed
the
feature-launch-revamp-fix
branch
from
634f16f
to
aca2c53
Compare
Description
Issues Fixed
Tasks
Final checklist