On 5 September 2017 at 13:15, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 11:15:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>
>> While it's an interesting suggestion, dub has 355 open issues, would be better if more people pitched in on those:
>>
>
> I have zero interest in fixing dub issues since I have zero interest in using dub.
>
> If one of the libraries were compelling... and I actually knew about it though, that equation may change.
>
> Making the code repository show documentation will do a lot to make the library more discoverable and valuable, which in turn, can drive dub use and bring with it more contributors.
>

This is exactly what I was thinking.

On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 03:15:58 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 11:15:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> While it's an interesting suggestion, dub has 355 open issues, would be better if more people pitched in on those:
>
> I have zero interest in fixing dub issues since I have zero interest in using dub.

I have not been using dub either, so I didn't know about all the open issues until now, when I started trying out dub on Android/ARM, where I will soon be shipping it with the ldc package for the Termux Android app.

> If one of the libraries were compelling... and I actually knew about it though, that equation may change.
>
> Making the code repository show documentation will do a lot to make the library more discoverable and valuable, which in turn, can drive dub use and bring with it more contributors.

If the library authors wanted all that, they'd put up the docs themselves.  But sure, doing it for them could help.

> I think this is a good idea (and I bought a VM to set up to do it myself, but I went too cheap and the 512 MB of memory isn't enough to actually build the docs! ugh.)

Great, I'd like to see more people chip in with the open issues though, like I have been recently with a few.

On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 03:47:12 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On 5 September 2017 at 13:15, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 11:15:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>>
>>> While it's an interesting suggestion, dub has 355 open issues, would be better if more people pitched in on those:
>>>
>>
>> I have zero interest in fixing dub issues since I have zero interest in using dub.
>>
>> If one of the libraries were compelling... and I actually knew about it though, that equation may change.
>>
>> Making the code repository show documentation will do a lot to make the library more discoverable and valuable, which in turn, can drive dub use and bring with it more contributors.
>>
>
> This is exactly what I was thinking.

btw, there is a three-year-old open issue for this:

https://github.com/dlang/dub/issues/355

The dub codebase isn't that big- DScanner reports 14.4 klocs- and Sonke's code is nicely formatted and easy to dive into.  Everybody wants stuff in dmd, from bug fixes to new features, but doesn't necessarily have the compiler knowledge or bandwidth to decipher Walter's code.

Dub, on the other hand, is something most everybody can understand, and PRs would benefit the entire community.  It is still primarily a one-man show, despite Martin's efforts:

https://github.com/dlang/dub/graphs/contributors

I suggest everyone take a look at some of those issues, most are potential enhancements that anyone could add.

On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 10:47:47 UTC, Manu wrote:
> Suggest; code.dlang.org should attempt to generate ddoc for each hosted project, host it, and clearly link to it from the project front-page. Hosted docs should be styled consistently (matching phobos?).
>
> Thoughts?
> - Manu

It would be nice if the DUB will be able to generate "docsets" for offline documentation browsers:

https://kapeli.com/dash (can be integrated into various IDEs!)
https://zealdocs.org/
http://devdocs.io/

On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 03:15:58 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 11:15:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> While it's an interesting suggestion, dub has 355 open issues, would be better if more people pitched in on those:
>
> I have zero interest in fixing dub issues since I have zero interest in using dub.
>
> If one of the libraries were compelling... and I actually knew about it though, that equation may change.
>
> Making the code repository show documentation will do a lot to make the library more discoverable and valuable, which in turn, can drive dub use and bring with it more contributors.
>
> I think this is a good idea (and I bought a VM to set up to do it myself, but I went too cheap and the 512 MB of memory isn't enough to actually build the docs! ugh.)

If you want a larger VM email me specs and I will set one up for you.

I guess the doc generation doesn't need much changing on dub.  Maybe an extra command line option to build and publish docs that calls a field specified in dub.sdl like postgenerate command because you don't want to build docs every time and creating separate build configurations means you now have double the number, with and without docs.  And custom command allows you to use a different doc generator.  But we could have a default command to generate those for dub the repository.

And then the template for the web site would just need to have a link to appropriate directory added?

We have contributed to dub in past - John Colvin worked on this.  One problem was lack of bandwidth to review pull requests.  If we get better review and still don't have contributions then one can address that directly, but for now review seems the bottleneck.

On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 07:59:09 UTC, denizzzka wrote:
> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 10:47:47 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> Suggest; code.dlang.org should attempt to generate ddoc for each hosted project, host it, and clearly link to it from the project front-page. Hosted docs should be styled consistently (matching phobos?).
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> - Manu
>
> It would be nice if the DUB will be able to generate "docsets" for offline documentation browsers:
>
> https://kapeli.com/dash (can be integrated into various IDEs!)
> https://zealdocs.org/
> http://devdocs.io/

This has been merged this week:
http://devdocs.io/d/

On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 02:21:26 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 10:47:47 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> I've seen a lot of dub projects with embedded ddoc that follows phobos
>> example.
>> These projects are then hosted on code.dlang.org, but often, the docs are
>> never generated and hosted anywhere.
>> In the event they are, links to docs are ad-hoc and unpredictable, and the
>> formatting/styling/etc is not standard/consistent.
>>
>> Suggest; code.dlang.org should attempt to generate ddoc for each hosted project, host it, and clearly link to it from the project front-page. Hosted docs should be styled consistently (matching phobos?).
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> - Manu
>
> Mir uses http://docs.algorithm.dlang.io/latest/index.html for its docs. Perhaps something like it could be extended for other projects?
> I think Sebastian Wilzbach would be the person to contact about this.

Unfortunately the setup for Mir's repositories is quite complicated as it's based on Ddoc and dlang.org.
I think a better approach would be to use adrdox or Ddox with the scod theme [1].

[1] https://github.com/MartinNowak/scod

On 09/05/2017 12:05 PM, Seb wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 07:59:09 UTC, denizzzka wrote:
>> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 10:47:47 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>> Suggest; code.dlang.org should attempt to generate ddoc for each hosted project, host it, and clearly link to it from the project front-page. Hosted docs should be styled consistently (matching phobos?).
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>> - Manu
>>
>> It would be nice if the DUB will be able to generate "docsets" for offline documentation browsers:
>>
>> https://kapeli.com/dash (can be integrated into various IDEs!)
>> https://zealdocs.org/
>> http://devdocs.io/
> 
> This has been merged this week:
> http://devdocs.io/d/

Nice! Who did the work? -- Andrei

On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 02:08:08 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On 4 September 2017 at 21:45, user1234 via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 10:47:47 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>> - Manu
>>>
>>
>> It has existed in the past, see http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ weuxppabkrreaxbqqpdv@forum.dlang.org?page=1
>>
>
> Seems to be gone.

Yes of course it's gone. That's a fact. I wanted to bring this fact in the discussion. That has existed already. I think nobody cared about the initiative.

On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 22:30:24 UTC, user1234 wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 02:08:08 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> On 4 September 2017 at 21:45, user1234 via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, 4 September 2017 at 10:47:47 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> - Manu
>>>>
>>>
>>> It has existed in the past, see http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ weuxppabkrreaxbqqpdv@forum.dlang.org?page=1
>>>
>>
>> Seems to be gone.
>
> Yes of course it's gone. That's a fact. I wanted to bring this fact in the discussion. That has existed already. I think nobody cared about the initiative.

I think it was nice. It just wasn't particularly well integrated and it's look and feel was... off.

This thread proves theres interest in this, so it would certainly be worth some time.

Maybe reviving kiith-sa's work or starting a new?