docs: Overall review for public release #46
Conversation
PipKat
requested review from
AlejandroFernandezLuces and
RobPasMue
as code owners
github-actions
bot
added
the
documentation
PipKat
changed the title
TokenIgnores = (:.*:`.*`)
…al/ansys-tools-common into docs/overall_review
|
@RobPasMue @AlejandroFernandezLuces There seems to be a doc-building issue when it gets to the API section. Would you please see if you can fix it. I have the local launcher pages of the user guide to edit still, before moving into the API and contribute sections. |
RobPasMue
changed the title
|
@Revathyvenugopal162 - are you familiar with this autoapi error? |
I think my change #46 (comment) might fix it |
|
Yep - fixed. You are good to go @PipKat! |
AlejandroFernandezLuces
left a comment
AlejandroFernandezLuces
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM! Thanks for the review @PipKat 🚀
RobPasMue
left a comment
RobPasMue
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM too!
Regarding your comments - we will keep it as Ansys Tools Common for now, but thanks for raising the topic!
@AlejandroFernandezLuces - I would recommend going with a sentence similar to the one suggested by @PipKat for PyAEDT (if not already done)
@RobPasMue and @AlejandroFernandezLuces
A few comments--the name of this library seems like it should be PyAnsys Common Tools rather than Ansys Common Tools. However, you might have a reason that Ansys Common Tools was chosen, so I've left it as such.
The README mentions only the Discussions page on the Developer Portal, but this repository also has a Discussions page enabled. Should we disable this repository's Discussions page and push users to the Discussions page on the Developer Portal? We could also consider rephrasing this README sentence similar to the PyAEDT README one:
On the PyAEDT Issues page, you can create issues to report bugs and request new features. On the PyAEDT Discussions page or the Discussions page on the Ansys Developer portal, you can post questions, share ideas, and get community feedback.
Lastly, I tried to put more information in the User guide section and make the pages in this section similar. You should review this content carefully. Also, there are some missing descriptions in the API Reference section, but I think the documentation is definitely good enough for the repository to go public now, especially if there is a push for its release.