- .py file encoding errors, it would be good if all .py files had this as the first line "# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-#" and be properly encoded. Just run into it with "amara.lib.iri.py", adding the coding line and saving it fixed it as far as Sphinx is concerned.
Following files generate import errors when I am generating the .rst files (basically walking the folder structure and import the modules to get at the classes, methods, functions).
Files causing an issue:
xpath.extensions.BuiltInExtFunctions
xpath.extensions.MathFunctions
xpath.locationpaths.axisspecifiers'
'xpath.locationpaths.predicates'
Package I needed to exclude "xslt.tree" as the __init__.py of it caused an import issue
Will have another look at these later on and see if I find a way of keeping them in the doc.
Excluded folders "test" (shouldn't be an issue) and "tools".
After that I build it and it generates what you can see here (put it temporarily onto my site):
http://thewinecellarbook.com/amaraTemp/
http://thewinecellarbook.com/amaraTemp/bindery.nodes.entity_base.html
I am still getting over 200 Sphinx build errors (much better then the two thousand I had the other day:-) ) which I will start chasing down.
I get mainly these type of errors:
<autodoc>:: WARNING: Duplicate explicit target name: "amara.bindery.model.attribute_constraint".
Either 'attribute_constraint' is defined twice or the extracter messed up.
Obviously still a lot of work before it is usable.
- Initial page needs to be filled with some better nicer content, e.g. an overview, maybe some history ..... etc.
- samples such as how to use xml_write would be nice to have them e.g. here:
http://thewinecellarbook.com/amaraTemp/amara.writers.html?highlight=xml_write
- more/better doc strings
Obviously still a lot of work before it is usable.
- Initial page needs to be filled with some better nicer content, e.g. an overview, maybe some history ..... etc.
I can start with this stuff. Should I just e-mail .rst files to this thread?
Note: the trunk of Amara is on github, are you just going to keep on going and issue a pull request?
- samples such as how to use xml_write would be nice to have them e.g. here:
http://thewinecellarbook.com/amaraTemp/amara.writers.html?highlight=xml_write
That's just a matter of updating the docstring, right?
Attached is a zip with the generation stuff.
To use it:
- update config.py with relevant path information (amara to doc path,
and path to tools)
- update source/conf.py with relevant path information (amara to doc path)
- makeRst.py html True - to do a full generation, it writes files to
tempsource and then only writes changed files to source, "html" defines
the builder, at this point no difference in makeRst for different
builder, "True/False" full or partial build
- makeSphinx.py html True, params have same meaning as above
- build/index.html to look at the result
Work to be done:
- remove all the widget screen shot stuff
- resolve the makeRst and makeSphinx errors
Werner
On 23/04/2012 11:25, Werner wrote:
> Work to be done:
> - remove all the widget screen shot stuff
done, at the moment just commented
> - resolve the makeRst and makeSphinx errors
down to 45 errors which are the same then Luis Miguel is getting and a
few more in relation to FT and some other things.
One thing I am chasing and can not figure out is this.
In Luis Miguel's doc there is:
http://docs.xml3k.org/amara.html?highlight=xml_write#module-amara.tree
In it is a class "amara.tree.node".
If I look at amara.tree.py there is no such class in that file and a
search for "class node(" in the amara site-packages folder only gets a
hit in "amara.bindery.html.py".
So, where is this class coming from?
Werner
Thanks, Werner,
I'll review it later.
Saludos,
-- luismiguel (@lmorillas)
https://github.com/zepheira/amara
As a side note, I can't remember if Amara is using BitBucket or GitHub? They would clearly provide greater visibility and make it easy to participate here and there IMO. Even for ths docs.
https://github.com/zepheira/amara
As a side note, I can't remember if Amara is using BitBucket or GitHub? They would clearly provide greater visibility and make it easy to participate here and there IMO. Even for ths docs.
Damn. The sad thing is that I'm actually subscribed to it as well. sigh.
Well, I'm more optimistic. I think that we've got good docs and good
examples at our wiki and at the great amara based projects (most of
them at zepheira repositories). Sure we do need to improve
organization and visibility of our docs. If you like Sphinkx we can
convert docs with some kind of moin2rst tool. i can work on it this
month.
-- luismiguel
> --
> - Sylvain
> http://www.defuze.org
> http://twitter.com/lawouach
>