Skip to content

Documentation table of contents (and docs.scala-lang) is missing various doc pages #15079

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

Open
smarter opened this issue Apr 30, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@smarter
Copy link
Member

smarter commented Apr 30, 2022

For example the recently added https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty/blob/main/docs/_docs/usage/coverage.md can't be found on http://dotty.epfl.ch/docs/usage/, but looking into https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty/tree/main/docs/_docs/usage there's a bunch of other pages which are missing (they're probably mostly obsolete and should be deleted).

It seems like entries need to be manually added to sidebar.yml, I wonder if this could be automated?

I'm also not sure what needs to be done for https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty/blob/main/docs/_docs/usage/coverage.md to appear on https://docs.scala-lang.org/.

@pikinier20
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, we've got sync mechanism for reference section. usage section is still not synchronized. As for the sidebar.yaml, I think we can automate it a bit by just adding directory to the YAML. It should load all children of this directory to the documentation

@ckipp01
Copy link
Member

ckipp01 commented May 24, 2023

I wanted to follow-up on this. I see that the coverage page is indeed listed at https://dotty.epfl.ch/docs/internals/coverage.html now.

I'm also not sure what needs to be done for https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty/blob/main/docs/_docs/usage/coverage.md to appear on https://docs.scala-lang.org/.

Since this is part of the "internals" docs, do we really want it to be there? My understanding was that these types of docs should remain on the dotty site for now? If so I'm tempted to close this. Any thoughts @smarter?

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.

5 participants