search

jolie / docs

The Jolie Documentation files
5 stars 19 forks source link

standard library not aligned #65

Open klag opened 3 years ago

klag commented 3 years ago

it seems that the standard library into the documentation is not aligned with the actual one in the repo.

ex: RuntimeService

fmontesi commented 3 years ago

Huh.. @xiroV, @thesave, and @bmaschio, could you have a look?

thesave commented 3 years ago

I don't remember if we generate it automatically anymore (once we did, but IIRC an update broke the generator). If @bmaschio and @xiroV are available, we can set a meeting and try to tackle this. Let me know :)

klag commented 3 years ago

@thesave what about this issue? It seems it still persists

thesave commented 3 years ago

I think this and https://github.com/jolie/docs/issues/66 and https://github.com/jolie/docs/issues/62 are all related. However, I do not know how we now generate the docs for the standard library after we moved to the new system. @bmaschio, @xiroV do you have a pointer to that? Do we use joliedoc?

fmontesi commented 3 years ago

I think it's still your old system, which is simply... Not used by the DevOps pipeline. :-)

On Tue, 18 May 2021, 17:47 thesave, @.***> wrote:

I think this and #66 https://github.com/jolie/docs/issues/66 and #62 https://github.com/jolie/docs/issues/62 are all related. However, I do not know how we now generate the docs for the standard library after we moved to the new system. @bmaschio https://github.com/bmaschio, @xiroV https://github.com/xiroV do you have a pointer to that? Do we use joliedoc?

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jolie/docs/issues/65#issuecomment-843284891, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAP3DSNOTSQGAPAYJWA6U53TOKD25ANCNFSM4ZQ3W2CA .

mwallnoefer commented 1 month ago

This continues to be an issue, e.g. als the fmt call in StringUtils is missing.

mwallnoefer commented 6 days ago

Also MetaParser continues to not exist as a package and still needs to be included over import "metarender.iol" (and the service is called MetaRender and not Parser).

klag commented 6 days ago

At the moment, metaservice is not delivered as a package, I think it is very useful to have it, also because some tools like jolier exploits it for working. @fmontesi wanted to refactor it, but I don't know if this activity is completed or not. I think that if the refactoring is not ready, we can publish metaservice as a package by now.

fmontesi commented 6 days ago

@kicito I think you're the last one who looked at the problem of generating the documentation for the standard library. Was there any progress there?

In any case, we have the problem of updating the documentation website whenever I release a new version of Jolie. So, probably, the best choice is that the DevOps pipeline for Jolie releases (from github.com/jolie/jolie) also somehow updates the website's documentation for the right version. @kicito @mwallnoefer @klag what do you think? Or do you have other ideas?

@klag @mwallnoefer Regarding metaservice, it's already included. You're probably thinking of metajolie and metarender. It's going to be a while before we have a good solution where the Java and Jolie implementations of Jolie code representations are kept in sync, because of interesting technical issues. The new jolie2java is part of the solution but we'll need more features (more type primitives, for instance). So I think that, in the meantime, we should just copy metajolie and metarender from include to packages. @klag will you do the honours? You're the one who uses them so you're the one in the best position to check that they work by import after the change.

klag commented 6 days ago

Yes I can do. In the meanwhile I am refactoring jolier, I'll do alltogether

kicito commented 5 days ago

I should have time to address this issue related to generating documentation for the standard library from this week. I'm unsure if joliedoc will be compatible with the new syntax, but updating the code should be straightforward. I agree that it should be a GitHub action from the main repository jolie/jolie, which builds the HTML and packs it into an artifact. This would then trigger jolie/doc and update the content.