<div dir="ltr">+1 to mix and match wiki-editable with source-controlled wiki content.<div><br></div><div>For the tutorials I'd like to discuss a solution that has come to my mind. Let's keep it simple with the tools available. Why don't we just make tutorial packages with example source code? Therefore, the documentation could parse if that package ends in "<i>tutorials</i>" it must be added to the documentation of the parent package. Furthermore, the build dependencies will be kept and the sources can be built in the current buildfarm (debian package generation is not necessary). There are some packages that are structured like this: ros_tutorials, navigation_tutorials, geometry_tutorials... </div><div><br></div><div>However, what if a developer wants to write tutorials without fully compilable code? I think that the tutorials can be placed in the .<i>roswiki</i> file along with the package documentation as well as in compilable <i>pkg_tutorials</i>. Another mix&match.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">Miquel Massot</blockquote><div><div><a href="mailto:miquel.massot@gmail.com" target="_blank">miquel.massot@gmail.com</a> <a href="https://github.com/miquelmassot" target="_blank"><img src="http://ncuillery.github.io/angular-breadcrumb/img/GitHub-Mark-16px.png"></a></div></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">2014-11-24 16:42 GMT+01:00 Mike Purvis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mpurvis@clearpathrobotics.com" target="_blank">mpurvis@clearpathrobotics.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">The ideal IMO would be to implement this as a macro— so much as the wiki today displays the manifest.yml information generated from doc jobs, the wiki of tomorrow could have a macro which sucks in a similarly-extracted file.<div><br></div><div>This allows the flexibility to mix and match wiki-editable content where that is appropriate with blobs of source-controlled content, where <i>that</i> is more appropriate. It also offers a sane migration strategy.</div><div><br></div><div>The really, really ideal would be if the "mytutorial1.roswiki" file in my repo could actually optionally be itself a templated affair, perhaps supporting a format like mytutorial1.rowiki.em, so that things like blobs of example source code or whatever could be sucked in from marked-off sections of actual working examples which can then be tested during the source build.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On 24 November 2014 at 10:18, Jonathan Bohren <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jonathan.bohren@gmail.com" target="_blank">jonathan.bohren@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_quote"><span>On Mon Nov 24 2014 at 3:38:46 AM Miquel Massot Campos <<a href="mailto:miquel.massot@gmail.com" target="_blank">miquel.massot@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>In my opinion, maintaining a repo and the documentation in two different sites is a bit confusing. One often makes changes to the repository without remembering how the roswiki entry was done, thus breaking the completeness or correctness of it. As most of us are developing on GitHub, would it make sense to have a document in each of our repositories "<i>something.roswiki"</i> so that the documentation generator<span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px"> </span></div></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>pastes it into the roswiki?<span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px"> </span></div></div></blockquote><div> </div></span><div><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px">I agree. The wiki is broken, and package documentation should reside in the packages wherever the code is hosted.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px">Unfortunately, as Dirk said, "</span><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px;line-height:15.8399991989136px">whatever change you propose must be implemented by someone."</span><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px"> So, I'm asking directly:</span></div><div><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px">What resources does OSRF have to re-work the ROS wiki pages for packages and tutorials in a way that simply aggregates documentation from package source repositories?</span></div><span><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div><span style="font-size:13.6000003814697px">-j</span></div></font></span></div>
<br></div></div><span class="">_______________________________________________<br>
ros-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users@lists.ros.org" target="_blank">ros-users@lists.ros.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users" target="_blank">http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users</a><br>
<br></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
ros-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users@lists.ros.org">ros-users@lists.ros.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users" target="_blank">http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>