Add scaffolding for nitropy documentation

[szszszsz]

Bump

[daringer]

yeah that's on me, increasing priority ;) will do it tomorrow(tm)

[daringer]

Sooo, yeah looks very good, I love it, two points: 1) consistent naming (so let's stick the executable nitropy first), especially relevant for the articles linking into software/nitropy 2) like the sub-articles shown in software, but here we need consistency, too either have this like that everywhere or nowhere

In order to merge: 1) can be easily done by grepping for pynitrokey I guess and 2) is just adding max-depth: 2 everywhere then we just merge, wait for some feedback for 2) and keep or remove it afterwards...

[jans23]

IMO consistent naming would be pynitrokey because that's used in other places of the documentation already and it' the name of the software.

[szszszsz]

Agreed. We had that decision back then and have to stick now. pynitrokey is the name, and nitropy is the tool's call. This should be documented too to clear the doubts. Briefly looking, these pages look good enough. Let's merge it!

[robin-nitrokey]

@jans23

IMO consistent naming would be pynitrokey because that's used in other places of the documentation already and it' the name of the software.

@szszszsz

Agreed. We had that decision back then and have to stick now. pynitrokey is the name, and nitropy is the tool's call. This should be documented too to clear the doubts. Briefly looking, these pages look good enough. Let's merge it!

I discussed the naming topic with @daringer last week and we had a different understanding: pynitrokey is only the name for the package and not relevant for the user, nitropy (or: nitrokey-tool in the future) is the actual application. We even discussed whether we should go forward with the renaming before publishing this. (Also, the NetHSM and Nitrokey 3 documentation already uses the name nitropy.) Should I rename nitropy to pynitrokey in the docs anyway?

[robin-nitrokey]

like the sub-articles shown in software, but here we need consistency, too either have this like that everywhere or nowhere

@daringer Can you please elaborate on that? Is this about the navigation bar or the list in the page body? And what is the expected output?

[jans23]

Should I rename nitropy to pynitrokey in the docs anyway?

No opinion. Renaming would be most appreciated.

[daringer]

@daringer Can you please elaborate on that? Is this about the navigation bar or the list in the page body? And what is the expected output?

If I navigate into "Software" -> "nitropy" I can see a toc with the depth 2, instead of depth 1 (as it is everywhere else, e.g. nextbox). So "software" -> "nitropy" looks like this:

• All Platforms depth 1
  • Installing nitropy with pipx depth 2
  • Windows
  • Installing nitropy on Windows
  • Linux
  • Setting up the udev rules for nitropy

and e.g. NextBox looks like this (even though there are depth 2 items):

• Getting Started
• Hardware Overview
• Connect Devices
• Backup and Restore
• Managing Remote Access
• Technical Documentation
• NextBox FAQ

actually I like the max-depth: 2 approach a little more - whichever we choose it should be consistent.

[szszszsz]

Bumping

[jans23]

I agree to the above reasoning and think "nitropy" is the most appropriate name as of now (which will be renamed in the future).

Can this be merged?

[jans23]

Title words should start with capital letters.

[szszszsz]

Let's merge it and clean up later (by adding another ticket / PR). It's better to have an imperfect description, than having none.