-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 379
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
Docs: Restructure docs folder #1438
Docs: Restructure docs folder #1438
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Awesome job! Some nits but looks great, thank you :)
This makes me also want to migrate to a mdbook, which we probably should've done from the start...
I'm wondering now though, we should probably edit the wiki with this
716f129
to
fc4debb
Compare
Weeeell, I can work out a proposal if you like. In case I do step up to the task: Should we do that in a separate PR?
Is it really worth the effort in the long run? Especially when moving towards |
from the Wiki that details how to get started with using `cross`.
and remove the respective section from the README instead.
into two separate files in the `docs/` dir and enrich it with information taken from the Wiki.
with additional information from the wiki. Split up documentation in a new file in the `docs/` directory and add references to other files where appropriate.
fc4debb
to
f37f180
Compare
In e636ee5 I've made the While I think it's nice to have that part of the docs mirrored there, unfortunately all the "external" links to other MD docs are broken there. How should we proceed? Imo we have several options:
Approach 3 seems to rely on build files, tho. I see you're already using xtask, but I have no idea to what extent we can influence how the docs on |
That can be done separately. I opened #1446 to track it
What I meant with editing the wiki is simply just to make it say on each page "see
I think we can just remove the doc from the rustdoc, it's not needed and we can instead just point to the files in the crate package. The only reason its done was because the cross_toml.md file used to be the module documentation for that file bc54c2a#diff-a93d7b71ff09816ff274b195eaafc678ec01ab637abfe3ce49c0a14dfec32913 |
Sorry for the slow responses!
I see. Will you do that once this is merged, or should I?
Alright, got it. Now I have:
What do you think? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changes look great except the "broken" link being fixed.
Aside from that, I think this is ready for being merged, do you want to squash/fixup the commits you've marked as squash!
or fixup!
?
src/lib.rs
Outdated
/// Obtains the [`CrossToml`][1] from one of the possible locations | ||
/// | ||
/// These locations are checked in the following order: | ||
/// 1. If the `CROSS_CONFIG` variable is set, it tries to read the config from its value |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, this shouldn't be a broken link, it's a intra-doc link, please revert this
b49c238
to
f802493
Compare
to improve readability.
taken from the wiki with some added information.
which is now superseeded by the new arrangement of files in the `docs/` directory.
and explicitly point towards environment-variable based configuration which was previously missing. This should make that part of the documentation easier to find.
and limit text to 80 columns. Move a few hyperlinks to the bottom of the file rather than spraying them in between text passages.
fix a renamed TOML table key and update suboptimal linebreaks.
to make sure it's more visible and deduplicate installation examples with the `CROSS_DEB_ARCH` variable.
instead of the `cross_toml` file that has been replaced as part of this PR.
and make sure that `cross_toml` shows up as part of the official documentation along the way.
f802493
to
936804e
Compare
@Emilgardis That first rebase was a little too eager, sorry... Changes are in now! |
to point to the original repo instead of the fork for this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for this! I'll edit the wiki to point to these documents
Sort of a follow-up to #1315 which revealed a "mismatch" between what the
README
anddocs/
folder immediately provide as info compared to what's actually available.This restructures the
docs/
folder and adds information from various sources to it:At the moment this duplicates a decent amount of information already available on the Wiki. Strictly speaking this was already the case before this MR, where the
README
andcross_toml
each contained information from the Wiki. My motivation for moving these things into thedocs/
folder is that:docs
folder than to check for the Wiki. Most projects just don't use the WikiOn a personal note, I much prefer editing text in an editor I'm comfortable with, and Browsers don't fall into that category.
I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this proposed change.