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

chore: docs restructure #2322

Merged
merged 39 commits into from
Sep 19, 2023
Merged

chore: docs restructure #2322

merged 39 commits into from
Sep 19, 2023

Conversation

catmcgee
Copy link
Contributor

@catmcgee catmcgee commented Sep 15, 2023

  • Removed some things from the sidebar that were empty/WIP
  • Filled out 'how to participate' and 'visibility' sections
  • Changed around structure to make it easier to follow
  • use #include_code macro to pull in code from tests for getting started page
  • closes Review the monorepo README #1905

Checklist:

Remove the checklist to signal you've completed it. Enable auto-merge if the PR is ready to merge.

  • If the pull request requires a cryptography review (e.g. cryptographic algorithm implementations) I have added the 'crypto' tag.
  • I have reviewed my diff in github, line by line and removed unexpected formatting changes, testing logs, or commented-out code.
  • Every change is related to the PR description.
  • I have linked this pull request to relevant issues (if any exist).

@catmcgee catmcgee changed the title WIP: Docs restructure WIP: chore: docs restructure Sep 15, 2023
@critesjosh
Copy link
Contributor

I will start reviewing this, thanks Cat!

cc @iAmMichaelConnor so you can flag anything that might be concerning

```

NOTE: If `SANDBOX_VERSION` is not defined, the script will pull the latest release of the sandbox.

Copy link
Contributor

@iAmMichaelConnor iAmMichaelConnor Sep 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There's another 'getting started' guide somewhere that mentions port conflicts. We should mention that here too. If they get errors about port conflicts, when running this curl command, they should check whether those ports are already in use (insert the commands which would enable someone to check conflicting ports for 8080 and 8545).
To specify different ports, they'd need to edit the docker-compose file which got saved in .aztec/docker-compose.yml: nano .aztec/docker-compose.yml then change PORTS: 8080:8080 to PORTS: <other port>:8080 (and same for 8545 if there's a conflict at that port too). (I might have got the docker compose syntax wrong - I'm basing this off memory).

(As an alternative to modifying the docker-compose.yml, a user might be able to specify an env file (from memory), with overwrites to the ports)

Then, when doing CLI commands, they'd need to specify --rpc-url=<other port> with each cli command.

Copy link
Contributor

@iAmMichaelConnor iAmMichaelConnor Sep 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also, if they re-run the curl command, it will overwrite their custom changes to the port number in the docker-compose.yml file. (So the env file approach might be better)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we open a new issue to change the port from 8080 to 4273 (because it looks like AZTE(c)) and because 8080 is used by everything (especially the mainframe!)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am testing out editing the docker-comose.yml file. It looks like its <other port>:8080, but when it starts up it still prints sandbox Aztec Sandbox JSON-RPC Server listening on port 8080 in the terminal even when it's been changed.

I'll update the quickstart page with this note.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

created an issue here: #2381

I likely wont have time to add this to the docs in the next couple days, but can do later.

Copy link
Contributor

@iAmMichaelConnor iAmMichaelConnor Sep 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

but when it starts up it still prints sandbox Aztec Sandbox JSON-RPC Server listening on port 8080

Ah, yeah that'll be because from the sandbox's perspective, it's still communicating via port 8080 (regardless of which port you forward from your local machine)

@critesjosh critesjosh changed the title WIP: chore: docs restructure chore: docs restructure Sep 18, 2023
critesjosh and others added 3 commits September 18, 2023 19:58
add discord link, remove unused files/sections, update links
Copy link
Contributor

@critesjosh critesjosh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks for starting this @catmcgee! I am going to merge these changes and we can make additional edits if necessary.

@critesjosh critesjosh merged commit 1368b55 into master Sep 19, 2023
@critesjosh critesjosh deleted the docs-restructure branch September 19, 2023 01:15
@signorecello
Copy link
Contributor

signorecello commented Sep 19, 2023

@critesjosh I'm late to the party but I wonder if this is being deployed to netlify? Would be great to have a preview for docs changes

PhilWindle pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2023
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop*
---


<details><summary>aztec-packages: 0.7.8</summary>

##
[0.7.8](aztec-packages-v0.7.7...aztec-packages-v0.7.8)
(2023-09-19)


### Features

* `NodeInfo` cleanup
([#2370](#2370))
([89fe978](89fe978))
* Allow custom ports in sandbox
([#2393](#2393))
([41ef378](41ef378))
* Allow tracing build system with [debug ci]
([#2389](#2389))
([ce311a9](ce311a9))
* **docs:** Show current noir version for aztec in docs
([#2379](#2379))
([5c7b2ab](5c7b2ab))


### Bug Fixes

* Build script exiting on failed grep
([#2384](#2384))
([e70a781](e70a781))
* Bump e2e_sandbox_example.test.ts timeout
([#2391](#2391))
([9a1bb62](9a1bb62))
* Compile script for the unboxed project
([#2380](#2380))
([2801da2](2801da2))
* Force_deploy_build error
([#2375](#2375))
([4d1cbf9](4d1cbf9))
* Update aztec sandbox getting started markdown
([#2374](#2374))
([a3c6bcf](a3c6bcf))


### Miscellaneous

* Adds on-brand design to private token project
([#2355](#2355))
([072e313](072e313))
* Docs restructure
([#2322](#2322))
([1368b55](1368b55))


### Documentation

* Updated noirup command
([#2339](#2339))
([5308c21](5308c21))
</details>

<details><summary>barretenberg.js: 0.7.8</summary>

##
[0.7.8](barretenberg.js-v0.7.7...barretenberg.js-v0.7.8)
(2023-09-19)


### Miscellaneous

* **barretenberg.js:** Synchronize aztec-packages versions
</details>

<details><summary>barretenberg: 0.7.8</summary>

##
[0.7.8](barretenberg-v0.7.7...barretenberg-v0.7.8)
(2023-09-19)


### Features

* Allow tracing build system with [debug ci]
([#2389](#2389))
([ce311a9](ce311a9))
</details>

---
This PR was generated with [Release
Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See
[documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).
@critesjosh
Copy link
Contributor

critesjosh commented Sep 19, 2023

Yes it is. The problem is that previews will be created for every PR, which is irrelevant for most PRs and its noisy. That's why I turned it off. You can preview locally.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Review the monorepo README
4 participants