Skip to content
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

Translate doc to jupyter-book #124

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

vPibernus
Copy link

Status : draft

This is a translation of the current doc, in a jupyter book format.
The translation is a work in progress, but fix the issues #120 and #121 .
The work do not include an update of the CI pipeline to compile the translated doc.

@jschueller
Copy link
Member

jschueller commented Nov 26, 2024

-1
we moved away from ipynb examples because it had too much drawbacks: mainly versioning of binary data and difficulty to update/re-render the output cells

@SG-phimeca
Copy link
Collaborator

@jschueller: Note that jupyter-book is something different from jupyter notebook. jupyter-book can handle jupyter notebook sources. It also compiles markdown and plain.

Python.https://jupyterbook.org/en/stable/intro.html

@jschueller
Copy link
Member

jschueller commented Nov 26, 2024

I still see .ipynb getting versionned here so I'm guessing jupyter-book still takes ipynb as source documents, which is bad for versioning
anyway imho its overkill to change tech just for badly sized images (their pixel sizes are just hardcoded)

@SG-phimeca
Copy link
Collaborator

Indeed. I think this is beacause the work is in an early stage. As mentioned by @vPibernus , “The work do not include an update of the CI pipeline to compile the translated doc.”.
Eventually, the shift would require to update the CI, and commit only the source.

The change in technology would fix some of the issues currently experienced.
I agree with the term overkill for just this.

The proposed technological change is motivated by the different syntax.
Current technology focus mainly on presenting python code.
Text is entered as commentaries.
Jupyter book seems more convenient (subjective opinion) for writing text.

All in all, I think this is a matter of personal taste.
Should we rewrite the doc (I think we should), the people involved will have to decide (again: opinion).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants