-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 51
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
Make guide service centric #499
Make guide service centric #499
Conversation
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 32s |
64ee315
to
a200c23
Compare
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 32s |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks OK to me so far 👍
content/docs/guide.md
Outdated
# downstream (Fedora) RPM package name | ||
downstream_package_name: packit.dev | ||
downstream_package_name: directory |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is the second time we show the output of packit init
on this page, but I can't decide which one to remove, so I think I'm fine with it.
So just heads up to make sure you are aware of it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I am on the same boat with this. I can't decide..;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well at this point, folks should already have their packit.yamls prepared, so I'd drop this one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
very nice write-up so far, much clearer!
Take a look at the tables [here](/docs/actions/) to know what actions are available for each job. | ||
|
||
|
||
### How to try that for real |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
since this is mainly about testing the RPM builds locally, would it make sense to rename this and be more specific?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This was aimed to verify the build went well locally and that there is a high chance it will work in the service. At least, that was the goal. (I don't want to focus on using CLI for actual usage, just as a way how to reproduce/debug problems...)
I am still not satisfied with that -- at least, there is that duplicate packit init
output...
Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
This is intentionally really basic. This does not cover the authentication. Fixes: packit#470 Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Fixes: packit#468 Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
a200c23
to
8b92038
Compare
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 27s |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The content and structure overall looks very good! I've just added a couple of nitpicks regarding grammar, readability and similar things, otherwise LGTM
|
||
## 3. Configuration | ||
|
||
Packit uses a configuration file to let Packit know what to do, when to do it and how. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggestion: Packit uses a configuration file for specifying what to do, when and how to do it.
Co-authored-by: František Nečas <[email protected]>
@FrNecas Thanks for such a detailed grammar&consistency check! |
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 41s |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Last nitpicks, otherwise LGTM!
@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@ bookCollapseSection: true | |||
|
|||
* [About]({{< ref "about" >}}) - Key principles of Packit. | |||
* [Onboarding Guide]({{< ref "guide" >}}) - How to start using Packit. | |||
* [Packit Service]({{< ref "packit-service" >}}) - GitHub App that helps you continuously ensure that your project work in Fedora OS. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This link is still valid, is it not? So it should probably be kept here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But it's a duplicate of the one above. (There are no longer two pages.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🚀
Co-authored-by: František Nečas <[email protected]>
Build failed. ❌ pre-commit NODE_FAILURE in 0s |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is such a great improvement, I love this!
Just a few small suggestions.
content/docs/guide.md
Outdated
# downstream (Fedora) RPM package name | ||
downstream_package_name: packit.dev | ||
downstream_package_name: directory |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well at this point, folks should already have their packit.yamls prepared, so I'd drop this one.
It's hard to maintain up-to-date state and it's not relevant to users. Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Build failed. ❌ pre-commit NODE_FAILURE in 0s |
recheck |
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 17s |
…vice Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 25s |
Co-authored-by: Tomas Tomecek <[email protected]>
@jpopelka @lbarcziova @FrNecas @TomasTomecek Thanks for the reviews! Anything else I should resolve/cover/add/update? |
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 36s |
I am going to merge this but let me know (or create a new issue) in case of any additional suggestions/notes/... Thanks for the reviews! |
Build succeeded (gate pipeline). ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 15s |
Should have been removed in packit#499 Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Should have been removed in packit#499 Signed-off-by: Frantisek Lachman <[email protected]>
Acceptance criteria from the issue:
jobs
concept is well-described. Users can find and pick the relevant jobs. Also, it's easy to find more details and instructions.Fixes: #480