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

Migrate readme project to another docs framework #468

Open
armanbilge opened this issue Aug 10, 2021 · 7 comments
Open

Migrate readme project to another docs framework #468

armanbilge opened this issue Aug 10, 2021 · 7 comments

Comments

@armanbilge
Copy link
Member

The readme project currently depends on scalatex which unfortunately no longer seems to be maintained. Thus the docs should migrate to another framework, e.g. mdoc supports Scala.js although it's not entirely clear to me if this is introducing a circular dependency or not.

@aappddeevv
Copy link

Just thinking out loud that it may be easier to just make the readme a static github md file and remove interactivity and other visuals. Then just add the readme as the main readme.md for the repo. Maybe add some critical content if someone identifies it is missing. At least reduces complexity for awhile.

@armanbilge
Copy link
Member Author

Yeah, that can be our back-up plan if things break before someone gets around to this. For now still seems to be working!

@armanbilge armanbilge added the good first issue We'd love a PR! label Oct 26, 2021
@armanbilge
Copy link
Member Author

Just a quick note—I had a go with mdoc.js in http4s/http4s-dom#29 and I had an excellent experience. I think it is very viable to port the current docs, and would be a fun project for a motivated individual :)

I'm marking this as "good first issue": I think the trickiest part would be the build setup, which I can help with if someone is interested to work on this. From there it should be pretty straightforward!

Finally, a note on the circular dependency: well, that seems unavoidable :) (scalatex also technically has a circular dependency to sjs-dom v1!). However, it's worth noting that the mdoc.js dependency is fairly uncoupled in the sense that it doesn't need sjs-dom to build (since its just doing source-generation) nor does it put sjs-dom on the classpath automatically. Their sjs-dom dependency is purely for testing and generating their own docs.

@armanbilge armanbilge pinned this issue Jul 4, 2022
@armanbilge
Copy link
Member Author

armanbilge commented Aug 31, 2022

At least a couple issues have reported issues running prePR due to weird scalatex errors. So this is even more incentive to change. Edit: aha, it is lihaoyi/Scalatex#69.

[info] compiling 2 Scala sources to C:\Users\mario\code\src\github.com\mabasic\scala-js-dom\readme\target\scala-2.12\classes ...
[error] C:\Users\mario\code\src\github.com\mabasic\scala-js-dom\readme\Index.scalatex:43:6: type mismatch;
[error]  found   : scalatex.site.Section.Proxy
[error]  required: scalatags.Text.all.Frag
[error]     (which expands to)  scalatags.generic.Frag[scalatags.text.Builder,String]
[error] @sect{scala-js-dom}
[error]      ^
[error] one error found
[error] (readme / Compile / compileIncremental) Compilation failed
[error] Total time: 136 s (02:16), completed 31.08.2022. 22:51:29

@zetashift
Copy link
Contributor

What about just using scaladoc 3? https://docs.scala-lang.org/scala3/scaladoc.html

@armanbilge
Copy link
Member Author

@zetashift does Scaladoc 3 support Scala.js? I.e. can it be used to make interactive in-browser snippets?

@zetashift
Copy link
Contributor

That's a good one, it has runnable snippets, but I can't find anything about it for interative snippets :S

@armanbilge armanbilge linked a pull request Nov 3, 2022 that will close this issue
@zetashift zetashift self-assigned this Nov 3, 2022
@zetashift zetashift unpinned this issue Feb 27, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants