Skip to content

This is the initial recreation of docs using Antora #67

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

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: 3.0.x
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

settermjd
Copy link
Collaborator

While it's hardly complete, it's enough to get started. This PR presents the first, most basic Antora implementation of the documentation, along with the beginnings of the restructure and rewriting of the documentation.

While it's hardly complete, it's enough to get started. This change
presents the first, most basic Antora implementation of the
documentation, along with the beginnings of the restructure and
rewriting of the documentation.
@settermjd settermjd requested review from tyrsson and simon-mundy July 29, 2025 08:44
@settermjd settermjd self-assigned this Jul 29, 2025
@settermjd settermjd added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request labels Jul 29, 2025
Copy link
Member

@tyrsson tyrsson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Couple of things.

Do we want the bulk of the "docs-site" eg its style sheets etc in this repo or in the doc-site repo that will be published via github pages?

I would suggest moving all of that, images, css etc to that repo, which I will create in just a moment. Then have it pull this into a build just like it will do the other repo's. Or am I crazy? Feel free to tell me I'm crazy.

If I understood Antora correctly then our playbook would live in the docs.php-db.dev repo and be published to https://docs.php-db.dev (via github pages).

The above and the laminas-db -> phpdb changes are the only things I see that might need to be address.

Thanks for the work on this :)

@tyrsson
Copy link
Member

tyrsson commented Jul 30, 2025

See the relevant messages in discord regarding the github pages site.

This is a modest change at the end of the README to provide the
essentials of contributing to the Antora/AsciiDoc-based documentation.
This change removes the old docs directory containing the
Markdown-based documentation, replacing it with an Antora-based version.
@settermjd
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Couple of things.

Do we want the bulk of the "docs-site" eg its style sheets etc in this repo or in the doc-site repo that will be published via github pages?

I would suggest moving all of that, images, css etc to that repo, which I will create in just a moment. Then have it pull this into a build just like it will do the other repo's. Or am I crazy? Feel free to tell me I'm crazy.

If I understood Antora correctly then our playbook would live in the docs.php-db.dev repo and be published to https://docs.php-db.dev (via github pages).

The above and the laminas-db -> phpdb changes are the only things I see that might need to be address.

Thanks for the work on this :)

As I see it, each repo needs to be set up as a content source with an accompanying antora-playbook.yml file. Then, docs.php-db.dev can contain the antora.yml file which will bring all of the various content sources together into the holistic documentation.

As for the styling and images, that would definitely be a separate repository.

This is a small/partial change in the SQL docs, which starts to
reorganise this section of the docs into a slightly better structure,
and reworks the docs to help them be easier to read, and friendly to
everyone – especially newcomers.
@tyrsson
Copy link
Member

tyrsson commented Aug 19, 2025

You mean docs.php-db.dev would contain the playbook and each repo would contain a source marker file antora.yml? Also, the PR needs retargeted to the correct branch. Remember, we started over on versioning when the namespaced changed. The branch you branched this from is WAY behind the default branch. I think the issue is that you have not reforked or updated your default branch.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants