jazzband / geojson

Python bindings and utilities for GeoJSON

https://pypi.python.org/pypi/geojson/

BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License

898 stars 120 forks source link

Add include directive for Sphinx docs #134

Closed rayrrr closed 4 years ago

rayrrr commented 4 years ago

This PR uses a reST include directive in attempts of facilitating autogenerated ReadTheDocs docs while maintaining the rendered README on the GitHub repo homepage.

codecov[bot] commented 4 years ago

Codecov Report

Merging #134 into master will not change coverage. The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #134   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.36%   95.36%           
=======================================
  Files          10       10           
  Lines         345      345           
  Branches       69       69           
=======================================
  Hits          329      329           
  Misses          9        9           
  Partials        7        7

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update c492d11...954379e. Read the comment docs.

rayrrr commented 4 years ago

@auvipy I am the Project Lead of this repo. I already asked you nicely once before: please do not merge other peoples' open PRs in the geojson repo. Now, you have done it again. Now would be a good time to explain your penchant for doing this.

auvipy commented 4 years ago

hi, sadly I didn't read the linked comment so I just merged this as it seems simple. anyway now I learn that you are the project lead, I will be more careful with a further merge of any PR.

jezdez commented 4 years ago

@auvipy Quick note that I've replied to @rayrrr and you about this incident here: https://github.com/jazzband/roadies/issues/132#issuecomment-528739642

@rayrrr As a policy it may make sense for you to create draft PRs for those PRs that you want feedback first since they can't be merged without marking them ready for review first?

rayrrr commented 4 years ago

@auvipy thanks for the clarification, and I hope your behavior stays in line with your comment here going forward. @jezdez as for draft PRs, I guess we will have to give them a try.