-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 37
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
automated build of protobuf documentation missing #41
Comments
Comment by ArcEye I have updated my pull to include protobuf. Will see what running make generates and go from there. First thought is that the whole Table of Contents section at the top of the template is unnecessary. |
Comment by ArcEye Pretty much done Assuming the :ignore-front-matter: is still being added by the docs build, asciidoc.mustache now renders a asciidoc like so Which converts into a html with TOC like so |
Comment by ArcEye Finally found a way to make all One way which worked perfectly in asciidoc, ceased working once the document was converted to html 😝 Links above updated to view results |
Comment by ArcEye
Suggest a rider on the document to that effect, unless we can think of a way to disable the |
Comment by mhaberler hey, superb progress! "Edit this page" might refer to the template - does that make sense? otherwise it'd be great to have an edit link per-proto-file, that would make it super-easy to touchup on them/document them - the proto edits would go to mk/machinekit-protobuf |
Comment by ArcEye
Not really, since the template has no control over the content, just the format and order it is displayed in.
If you can think of a way to do that's great. The situation is just the same for the generated man pages, editing the page is pointless as the component is in another repo and needs to be subject of a proper PR, not just a document presentation tweak. I think we just have to be realistic, if someone actually knows something about protobuf or components, they should be able to make a PR in the normal way. |
Comment by ArcEye The main thing that needs doing in the .proto files is adding descriptions in a way that will get picked up by proto-gen-doc. That needs doing by someone who actually knows about them. You will note that every Description field in the tables is currently empty.
|
Comment by mhaberler congratulatios - pseudomuto/protoc-gen-doc#171 ! |
Comment by mhaberler I defintely will take on cleaning up the protos and adding proper comments being a lazy bastard I just thought we can work in an additional per-proto link to like for instance https://github.com/machinekit/machinetalk-protobuf/blob/master/src/machinetalk/protobuf/rtapicommand.proto anyway let's get this into the build process first and rearrange deckchairs second - what do I need to do? |
Comment by ArcEye
It is a good system and surprisingly easy to get professional results |
Comment by ArcEye
I will do a PR for the template shortly, but it will be subject to change to get the descriptions in
I would suggest just take one file for now and annotate as per the quoted text, 3 posts above. Try a general description in a That will give a known format to work with and we can see what proto-gen-doc makes of it and how best to set the template to display it. |
Comment by ArcEye Doing some experiments.
will produce So contrary to the docs, the description must appear immediately above (before) the field it is describing. Putting the same comment below |
Comment by ArcEye More experimentation File descriptions MUST start at line 1, col 1 They can either be block commented with I will PR the amended template Following this format produces: |
Comment by mhaberler super! thinking how to do this in jenkins as a first step I added machinetalk-protobuf as a subtree to the docs dir: https://github.com/mhaberler/machinekit-docs/tree/protobuf-subtree commands how it was created + how to update are in the commit message @ArcEye - if this is to your liking, I'll make it a PR the Makefile would do the git subtree pull ... sounds about right? |
Comment by mhaberler I must have botched that branch above this looks more like it: machinekit/machinekit-docs#166 frontmatter still missing |
Comment by mhaberler it seems to me we're next to done with the plumbing part - the editing of the protobuf messages itself of course not withstanding? |
Comment by ArcEye Looks like it, they seem to build fine |
Comment by ArcEye @Strahlex Whilst you are working upon the protobuf files, be aware of the documenting conventions as above at machinekit/machinekit#970 (comment) If you use them, anything thus marked will be automatically rendered in the docs |
Issue by mhaberler
Thu Jun 16 06:41:49 2016
Originally opened as machinekit/machinekit#970
this is an anchor issue for integrating the machinekit protobuf docs into the website
it's a sub-project of machinekit/machinekit#924 which is getting a tad long, so let's focus related work here
my overall idea is:
So to integrate the protobuf docs build into the website I guess we need to:
The build process then would be like so:
I will take care of the jenkins work to achieve that, but a sharing work with the template work would be great
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: