feanil/move old stuff #457
Conversation
feanil
commented
Mar 6, 2023
feanil
commented
- docs: Add a section for obsolete and replaced OEPs.
- feat: Add a way to do redirects.
- chore: Complie requirements to add sphinxext-rediraffe.
- feat: Add the ability redirect to moved files.
- docs: Move less relevant OEPs to an archived section.
- docs: Add redirects for all the files that have been moved.
feanil
force-pushed
the
feanil/move_old_stuff
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d32aa88 to
e66929e
Compare
sphinxext-rediraffe will let us generate redirects based on which files moved in our git history. This is usefule as we re-organize OEPs and mark them as obsoleted or replaced.
Ran the following commands to just add rediraffe without pulling in other things: CUSTOM_COMPILE_COMMAND="make upgrade" pip-compile --rebuild -P spinxext-rediraffe -o requirements/base.txt requirements/base.in CUSTOM_COMPILE_COMMAND="make upgrade" pip-compile --rebuild -P spinxext-rediraffe -o requirements/dev.txt requirements/dev.in
* Add the conf to generate redirects based on changes between a branch and master. * Add a CI check so we don't miss files that got moved around.
feanil
force-pushed
the
feanil/move_old_stuff
branch
from
d83f0a6 to
d38d239
Compare
|
|
||
| update_redirects: | ||
| # If files got moved there should be a redirect in redirects.txt | ||
| sphinx-build -b rediraffewritediff oeps $(BUILDDIR) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are both of these really the same command? It just returns a different status code when it finds new redirects?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The check one does not write anything but the update_redirects actually writes the changes if it has high enough confidence in them.
| .. attention:: | ||
|
|
||
| This decision was a one time decision and is not relevant to the current | ||
| active project. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is a related task in openedx/wg-frontend#131 for doing amnesty on eslint warnings which is actively being worked on, but I'm not sure if it's worth keeping the OEP open for that.
| .. attention:: | ||
|
|
||
| This proposal is deferred as there is no current plans to actively work on | ||
| implementing this work. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually this is a pretty high Arch-BOM priority captured in edx/edx-arch-experiments#138 , we're hoping to start work on it in the next 1-3 months. It also surfaced in https://openedx.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AC/pages/3615850497/Development+Environment+Vision#Continue-OEP-37-(Dev-Data)-implementation-%26-refinement as one of the top 3 next steps to improving our dev environments.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jmbowman would you be comfortable with moving this back out of the archives when it's being actively worked on or would you prefer it not move?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My preference would be to not move it because:
- It creates extra work to move it back later
- The optics of launching a nontrivial implementation project for an archived OEP aren't great
- Seriously, this is one of the team's top priorities for Q2
But let me know if that poses any problems I'm not aware of.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good, I'll remove that move from this PR.
Add a small info box to give people context for why the OEPs are in this section.
feanil
force-pushed
the
feanil/move_old_stuff
branch
from
0b123db to
5388822
Compare
