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

Target docs to manifest.json #15639

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 10, 2020
Merged

Target docs to manifest.json #15639

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 10, 2020

Conversation

chrisvanpatten
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This PR re-enables a docs manifest at manifest.json. It's the next step to normalizing our docs build workflow.

I've left manifest-devhub.json in the repo so we can merge this change and repoint DevHub to manifest.json without any temporary breaks.

Once that change has been made, I'll follow up with a final PR to remove devhub-manifest.json entirely.

I'd like to hold this PR for a few days in case we need to re-enable the old handbook for some reason, so I'll mark it as a draft. This is more of a placeholder for myself :)

@chrisvanpatten chrisvanpatten self-assigned this May 14, 2019
@chrisvanpatten chrisvanpatten added the [Type] Developer Documentation Documentation for developers label May 14, 2019
@chrisvanpatten chrisvanpatten requested a review from oandregal May 14, 2019 22:26
@chrisvanpatten
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nosolosw I feel like this might also be the right PR to reorganize the files themselves — moving everything up a level outside of the designers-developers folder. What do you think?

@oandregal
Copy link
Member

Perhaps we can make this change at the same time we update the branch to be used for the handbook? That way meta-devhub has to make only one SVN change and we avoid too much lock-branch-deleting dance on our side as well.

I feel like this might also be the right PR to reorganize the files themselves — moving everything up a level outside of the designers-developers folder. What do you think?

mmm, I lean towards create an isolated one: the reason is that path changes will be easier to spot as the only property changed will be markdown_source.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@chrisvanpatten chrisvanpatten left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I should note that I didn't end up removing the current manifest-devhub.json file in this commit, in case this lands before the associated meta patch lands. Removing it could cause the meta site to get 404s.

@chrisvanpatten chrisvanpatten marked this pull request as ready for review February 9, 2020 21:35
@chrisvanpatten chrisvanpatten requested review from mkaz and dd32 February 9, 2020 21:37
@chrisvanpatten
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note: This PR should ideally be merged in before the patch on the trac ticket. That way, the handbook won't be pointing to the current version of the manifest in master, which is fairly out of date.

Copy link
Member

@ntwb ntwb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me, I'll add commit to the meta ticket now, once that is committed this can be merged

Edit: This PR should be merged first

@ntwb ntwb merged commit 30b837a into master Feb 10, 2020
@ntwb ntwb deleted the remove/devhub-manifest branch February 10, 2020 01:17
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the Gutenberg 7.5 milestone Feb 10, 2020
@gziolo
Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Feb 10, 2020

Awesome, thanks @chrisvanpatten for cleaning it up 👍 We should also update docs with the follow-up patch when you remove the old file.

@coffee2code
Copy link

The change proposed in the associated meta ticket has been committed and deployed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[Type] Developer Documentation Documentation for developers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants