Open lazyhacker opened 3 years ago
They're not always packages; sometimes they are directories that hold packages at a deeper level. We couldn't come up with a better term.
Duplicate of #43327?
Technically not all of them are packages, but all leaves of the shown tree are packages, and only packages are linked. The sole purpose of the non-package directories is to group packages. Tree components in user interfaces are usually titled according to the type of the target objects, not the type of the structuring objects.
It seems like the intention of the section is to show the packages of the module and its package documentation so seems like "Packages" makes sense. Even the sub-directory section on the page looks like its primary intention is allow navigation to sub-package documentation rather then to actually expose the sub-"directories".
This section doesn't just show packages - it also shows nested modules. For example, https://pkg.go.dev/golang.org/x/tools#section-directories shows gopls with a module
label.
Maybe it makes sense to split the "Directories" section into three separate sections:
What is the URL of the page with the issue?
(example) https://pkg.go.dev/net/http
What is your user agent?
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/89.0.4389.114 Safari/537.36
Screenshot
What did you do?
Visit pkg.golang.org to look at package/module documentation.
What did you expect to see?
On the left menu, a link called "Packages" that links to a module's package documentation.
What did you see instead?
Instead of calling it "packages", it refers to it as "Directories". Go generally refers to "packages". "Directories" gives the impression that it's for browsing the source files. Even the summary description all say "Package xyz implements ..." since the rules is to have the document say "Package xyz...", but the UI says
Would it make more sense to say "Packages" instead?