Skip to content
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

Docs: fix bugs (broken links, missing examples) #5522

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 8, 2025

Conversation

EZoni
Copy link
Member

@EZoni EZoni commented Dec 19, 2024

Just fixing a few errors and warnings I found while working on another documentation PR. Mostly broken links and missing examples.

Merge #5523 first, see #5522 (comment) below.

@EZoni EZoni added the component: documentation Docs, readme and manual label Dec 19, 2024
@EZoni
Copy link
Member Author

EZoni commented Dec 19, 2024

Note: We should include "**.rst" in the paths to be ignored in order to decide whether we skip CI.

Update: Done in #5523. If we merge #5523 first, we can test it (i.e., test that CI is skipped) in this PR after we rebase here.

Comment on lines -25 to -29
Here's an example:

.. literalinclude:: ../../../Examples/Tests/embedded_circle/analysis.py
:language: python

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This code example is not relevant since #5456 has been merged (in fact, the file does not exist anymore). This checksum section of the documentation will be refactored soon anyways.

@RemiLehe RemiLehe requested a review from ax3l January 7, 2025 00:04
ax3l pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 8, 2025
Following up on #5387, I think we should also ignore all `.rst` files in
the repository when we decide whether or not to run the CI workflows.

GitHub Actions syntax taken from the examples
[here](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#patterns-to-match-file-paths)
(see `'**.js'` example). Azure syntax to be tested.

If we merge this before #5522, we can test it (i.e., test that CI is
skipped) in #5522 after rebasing there.
Copy link
Member

@ax3l ax3l left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Splendid, thx!

@ax3l ax3l merged commit 9fdc6ec into ECP-WarpX:development Jan 8, 2025
37 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
component: documentation Docs, readme and manual
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants