Skip to content

Add Github link support to beta and experimental macros #1705

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Jan 23, 2020
Merged

Add Github link support to beta and experimental macros #1705

merged 12 commits into from
Jan 23, 2020

Conversation

jrodewig
Copy link
Contributor

@jrodewig jrodewig commented Jan 21, 2020

We add the experimental::[] and beta::[] macros to document features that are not yet ready for GA. However, these tags don't currently indicate what steps are needed to get a feature to GA.

With these changes, users can include a GitHub issue for the feature in the experimental::[] or beta::[]. When provided, a concise sentence and link is generated for the issue.

Relates to https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/issues/51250

Examples

http://test__care-admon-links.docs-preview.app.elstc.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/master/_beta_experimental_macro_examples.html

We add the `experimental::[]` and `beta::[]` macros to document features
that are not yet ready for GA. However, these tags don't currently
indicate what steps are needed to get a feature to GA.

With these changes, users can include a GitHub issue for the feature in
the `experimental::[]` or `beta::[]`. When provided, a concise sentence
and link is generated for the issue.
@jrodewig jrodewig added enhancement Something we'd like to improve docs DO NOT USE for *contents* of our docs. Only use for documentation *about* this repo. labels Jan 21, 2020
@jrodewig jrodewig requested review from nik9000 and debadair January 21, 2020 23:15
Copy link
Member

@nik9000 nik9000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it is worth adding a test in the docbook_compat_spec file for this too.

@jrodewig jrodewig marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2020 14:37
@jrodewig
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for taking a look @nik9000.

While I was rewriting this to pass the Rubocop tests, I decided to add support for {issue} links as well. There are also unit tests for everything incare_admonition_spec.rb. It was fun learning more about Ruby and Rspec!

@jrodewig jrodewig requested a review from nik9000 January 22, 2020 17:14
Copy link
Member

@nik9000 nik9000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I left a small thing that you can change or not. Up to you. Otherwise looks great! Thanks for doing it!

I've grown to really like rspec and find ruby to be "ok". I love rubocop. I like that it feels crazy picky coming from java-land and that it makes me think about problems differently.

@jrodewig jrodewig merged commit a13cc8d into elastic:master Jan 23, 2020
@jrodewig jrodewig deleted the docs__gh-link-poc branch January 23, 2020 16:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
docs DO NOT USE for *contents* of our docs. Only use for documentation *about* this repo. enhancement Something we'd like to improve
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants