Open fredg02 opened 1 year ago
I see several points to discuss regarding CBI documentation:
1- Workflow
I propose using a documentation-as-code approach to take advantage of Git's concepts for validation and information sharing within the team with PR, reviews, ...
2- Writing (the format)
Different formats are available for document-as-code approach, such as Markdown or ASCIIDOC. No particular preference; both can be used depending on the context and type of documentation.
3- Organization
Documentation should be as close to the code as possible. It should be directly present in the project's code repository, either in the root directory or in a '/docs' directory.
4- Publishing
Publishing through a static website that aggregates the documentation from various projects present in versioned code repositories. See Antora: https://antora.org/"
I hope this helps as a starting point to restructure CBI documentation!
@fredg02 a quick POC with Antora and mkdocs to show how docs-as-code approach can be articulated. This involved configuration, aggregating repository documents and publishing to a static website with a CI.
NOTE: Antora has fewer docs integrated due to project conversion.
source: https://gitlab.com/sebastien.heurtematte1/eclipse-cbi-antora website: https://eclipse-cbi-antora-sebastien-heurtematte1-e89513092fa79467be20c.gitlab.io/eclipse-cbi-antora/1.0.0/index.html
Pros:
Cons:
source: https://github.com/heurtematte/eclipse-cbi-mkdocs website: https://heurtematte.github.io/eclipse-cbi-mkdocs/
Pros:
Cons:
Based on https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=480844, we should find a good location (not necessarily this repo) and collect all the info about CBI.