Move to mkdocs #346
Draft
Move to mkdocs #346
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ItsDrike
added
a: documentation
ItsDrike
force-pushed
the
mkdocs
branch
6 times, most recently
from
f9597f3
to
8288c8f
Compare
|
ItsDrike
force-pushed
the
mkdocs
branch
10 times, most recently
from
b7067cf
to
288dba2
Compare
ItsDrike
force-pushed
the
mkdocs
branch
3 times, most recently
from
a56a2ca
to
20230a0
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This removes Sphinx in favor of mkdocs for the project documentation.
Warning
This is an experimental PR, it isn't at all guaranteed that the project really will end up switching from sphinx to mkdocs, however, mkdocs does provide a much better user experience in terms of the overall design than sphinx and solves many other issues. This PR serves as a test, to see whether such a transition would be viable for us.
One thing that may or may not be a significant obstacle is porting the API reference. All of our docstrings currently use rst syntax and I'm not sure if mkdocs can handle that, or if it would mean having to rewrite them. If we would need to rewrite, another important question would then be whether the new syntax would support as many things as the sphinx one did. Worst case, it would actually be possible to keep sphinx alongside mkdocs, with sphinx being purely for the API reference. This may actually be worth it as the UX benefit from mkdocs is massive.