This all looks good but I'm wondering how this actually works on the repository. We just went through a big cleaning process and we don't want to have to deal with that again, so I'm hyper vigilant about uploading things to the repository. It seems like this pushes the pdfs to the repository each time. I see this discussion about that, for example. That then points to this as a way to push but not keep the history.

In short, I think whatever we do, we don't want the history of the pdfs pushed, just the most recent.

Thanks @etpeterson for the review, I used the deployment method you suggested and it worked fine, see: https://github.com/AhmedBasem20/TF2.4_IVIM-MRI_CodeCollection/actions/runs/8139256741

Thanks @etpeterson for the review, I used the deployment method you suggested and it worked fine, see: https://github.com/AhmedBasem20/TF2.4_IVIM-MRI_CodeCollection/actions/runs/8139256741

This run only ran 4 algorithms but I see on the hosted site that all of them ran. Why this discrepancy? I don't see anything in the code that should be changing that.

I also see there are a few pushes that caused commits but I don't see any changes more recently. I'm not sure how this should act, but with the algorithm discrepancy I'm still hesitant to merge until it's all clear.

My bad. I wanted to see the results quickly, so I removed most of the algorithms on this workflow. But the workflow of the committed code on this pull request works fine: https://github.com/AhmedBasem20/TF2.4_IVIM-MRI_CodeCollection/actions/runs/8139531990

I also see there is a few pushes that caused commits, but I don't see any changes more recently. I'm not sure how this should act, but with the algorithm discrepancy I'm still hesitant to merge until it's all clear.

Those pushes caused by the old action that deploys to gh-pages. It is removed now.

@etpeterson the publishing action depends on the artifact we uploaded, I used this action as a reference.
Will the documentation page be on this website? If so, we build this page along with the docs and add it there. But for now, I can improve the layout of the current HTML page until we get the documentation.

This looks good. I think there's an open question about where the results should land and if the index.html page should start with a little more on there, but that's for @petravanhoudt and @oliverchampion.

Just following up @oliverchampion or @petravanhoudt if you have ideas on the structure of the page.

superseded by #59