Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 95.57%. Comparing base (7aa32fe) to head (b933f86).

@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           buid-docs-using-pixi      #65   +/-   ##
=====================================================
  Coverage                 95.57%   95.57%           
=====================================================
  Files                        23       23           
  Lines                      1174     1174           
=====================================================
  Hits                       1122     1122           
  Misses                       52       52           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

Powered by ReviewNB

@timmens @janosg

I much prefer the JB-based version over the Sphinx-based one. Differences:

• I improved the usage patterns page a bit in the JB version
• No API docs in JB. My view: Nobody looks at them online anymore, all introspection in the editor / asking AI)

But no big deal if we went back to #63

Switching to Jupyterbook is ok and the new page does look better. However, I would keep the API docs in. It's almost zero cost to have it and I do use online API docs sometimes.

Does Jupyterbook have a good way of producing an llms.txt? If we touch the docs this would be the right time to add it.

Is it okay to postpone API docs until this one is there? jupyter-book/mystmd#1259

Would much prefer that over using Sphinx for now and then porting. Writing native MyST is so much nicer!