Thoughts on moving sphinx-contrib to GitHub

[Eric Holscher]

Hey All,

I know Sphinx has moved development to GitHub a while ago, but it seems the sphinx-contrib repo is still on bitbucket: https://bitbucket.org/birkenfeld/sphinx-contrib

Is there a reason that this wasn't moved over to GitHub in the migration?

Cheers,

Eric

[Robert Lehmann]

I think rather than going through the efforts of yet another migration, we should abandon the sphinx-contrib repository.  The original migration announcement read:

The contrib repository will remain at the usual location, although some extension

developers have expressed a preferences for separate repositories.  Therefore in

the future the main hub for extensions will be something similar to the survey

(http://sphinxext-survey.readthedocs.org/en/latest/) where extensions are featured

with links going to separate repos and PyPI entries where applicable.

There are also new PyPI classifiers for sphinx related packages:

Framework :: Sphinx

Framework :: Sphinx :: Extension

Framework :: Sphinx :: Theme

Once most package authors use them, a PyPI query is the easiest way to list all

available packages.

I don't think there's any advantage of sphinx-contrib, other than some kind of official blessing.  We could have this by just maintaining a list of extensions (and also a handy search for the trove classifiers) in our docs.

What do you think?

Cheers,

Robert

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sphinx-dev+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Bram Geron]

I see value in sphinxcontrib because it makes it easy for new extension authors to publish their extension. I have a few small extensions that I want to publish on GitHub+PyPI, but I don't know how complicated this is, what the recommended repository setup is, or what metadata or meta-files you need in which locations so currently the time investment is prohibitive for me. 

 

I'm not saying that sphinxcontrib should necessarily stay, but I think it would be good for the Sphinx ecosystem to have either sphinxcontrib or a detailed tutorial on how to publish Sphinx extensions in the simplest way possible.

 

Cheers, Bram

[Eric Holscher]

Agreed. It would be useful to move the `make-ext.py` file into the main Sphinx source, and document the proper way to create an extension.

I'm +1 on killing sphinx-contrib, especially since it makes specific extensions hard to install via pip.

Should we keep the `sphinxcontrib.` namespace, or just move towards `sphinx-<package>` naming? I have already done this with one of our packages at https://github.com/rtfd/sphinx-autoapi -- but I'm not sure the best way to document it.

Cheers,

Eric

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "sphinx-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sphinx-dev/QectTI8IYA8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to sphinx-dev+...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Eric Holscher
Maker of the internet residing in Portland, Oregon
http://ericholscher.com

[Bram Geron]

I don't have a strong opinion on this, but the sphinx-<package> naming
sounds nice to me.

Cheers, Bram