Closed vqhuy closed 7 years ago
@masomel : I rebased this branch with master
and moved some subpackages to /internal
in bdcf27b6fe1674eee244bd0c75b8b103aaba3cb4. What do you think? godoc will not show bar
package if it is an internal package of foo
(foo/internal/bar
).
You can use git fetch; git reset --soft origin/fix-doc
in your local branch to avoid conflict.
@arlolra @Liamsi Should we add documentation to the executables' main package? Original discussion: #131 (comment)
I agree with @c633 that this isn't really necessary.
Is this pull meant to still be in WIP? If so, what's left to do? It seems pretty reasonable to me.
Is this pull meant to still be in WIP? If so, what's left to do?
I'm doing one last pass over all the documentation to make sure we didn't miss anything. I don't think it needs to be in WIP for that though.
EDIT: I should only need 1-2 more hrs for this; any changes should be minor.
So, I know that we had talked about not needing summaries for executable commands, but their main packages still appear in godoc, and I think it's awkward that these packages don't have a summary. What if the summary just said something like "Executable X. See README for usage information"?
What if the summary just said something like "Executable X. See README for usage information"?
Sounds reasonable.
FYI, I fixed up the go formatting issues and rebased.
LGTM. Thank you @masomel @arlolra
Is this ready to be merged?
From my side, yes.
@arlolra @Liamsi Should we add documentation to the executables'
main
package? Original discussion: https://github.com/coniks-sys/coniks-go/pull/131#discussion_r89150645