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

Add readthedocs config #6

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jul 31, 2024
Merged

Add readthedocs config #6

merged 6 commits into from
Jul 31, 2024

Conversation

mcgibbon
Copy link
Contributor

This PR adds configuration needed for readthedocs. A test RTD project is created here. This will be removed and re-created under the main branch and a long-term name after this PR is merged.

Changes:

  • Added .readthedocs.yaml

  • Added pinned requirements in docs/requirements-pinned.txt to be used by RTD

  • Tests added

# See https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/guides/reproducible-builds.html
python:
install:
- requirements: fme/docs/requirements-pinned.txt
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What's the reason to not just give the fme/docs/requirements.txt and fme/requirements.txt files? We will have to remember to recompile the requirements-pinned.txt when those change.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Two reasons:

  • I wasn't sure that would work (whether you could specify two files), and testing changes requires waiting for sphinx to recompile on RTD which takes a little while
  • RTD strongly recommends pinning the package versions (see comment from the template directly above this), which makes sense for something as public-facing as docs.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay. Yeah I do see the rationale for pinning, but given the relatively infrequent updates to this repo, probably won't make much of a practical difference either way.

@mcgibbon
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also FYI I am having a hard time getting automatic builds to work for this, even though the github web hook is set up and says it's working. Currently I'm launching builds manually.

@oliverwm1
Copy link
Collaborator

Also FYI I am having a hard time getting automatic builds to work for this, even though the github web hook is set up and says it's working. Currently I'm launching builds manually.

Huh weird. Okay well yeah let's just build manually for now, and can sort out automating later on.

Copy link
Collaborator

@oliverwm1 oliverwm1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@mcgibbon mcgibbon merged commit cc0c233 into main Jul 31, 2024
4 checks passed
@oliverwm1 oliverwm1 deleted the feature/rtd branch July 31, 2024 20:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants