-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
[configuration] Improve transport configuration docs #3976
Comments
@lobsterkatie - which team should I route this to? Seems like it's web platform, yes? |
Sure, though anyone with knowledge of the docs structure could do this. They'd perhaps want a little consultation with web-platform on creating the node include, but mostly this is just shoving stuff around and combining a number of different versions of a page into a single version. |
This issue has gone three weeks without activity. In another week, I will close it. But! If you comment or otherwise update it, I will reset the clock, and if you label it "A weed is but an unloved flower." ― Ella Wheeler Wilcox 🥀 |
Routing to @getsentry/team-webplatform for triage. ⏲️ |
Core or SDK?
Platform/SDK
Which part? Which one?
multiple
Description
Two (and a half) issues to fix here:
1) Some of our SDKs have a
Transports
section in the main configuration docs. (Here's the Go one, for example.) Where those exist, we should link to them in thetransport
entry on the main options page.2) Ideally the various
Transports
pages can be consolidated into one template with includes. When we do this, we should create includes for node as well.2a) As part of a larger initiative to encourage more folks to open-source custom integrations and transports they build, we should add a
Community
section to saidTransports
template. Once we do that, we can add a link to the new Forge transport to the node include.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: