Bug/docs fix theme and cleanup #332
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request focuses on documentation consistency and minor styling updates across the VitePress documentation. The changes primarily involve renaming "API-Gateway" to "API gateway" across multiple files, updating the logo source in the theme extension, and enhancing the CSS styling with dark mode and mobile responsiveness. The modifications aim to improve documentation clarity, visual presentation, and ensure uniform terminology throughout the project. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🔇 Additional comments (1)docs/package.json (1)
The addition of lint and fix scripts using Prettier will help maintain consistent code formatting across the documentation. Let's verify if these scripts align with the refarch-templates repository as mentioned in the PR objectives: ✅ Verification successfulLet me try a different approach to verify the Prettier configuration alignment between the repositories. Let me try one final verification to check if we're using the Prettier configuration from the @muenchen/prettier-codeformat package. Let's check the content of the Prettier configuration file we found. Prettier configuration is properly set up and aligned with organizational standards The verification shows that:
🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the Prettier configuration matches between repos
# Note: Using gh cli to fetch package.json from the referenced repo
# Fetch package.json from refarch-templates repo
gh api /repos/it-at-m/refarch-templates/contents/docs/package.json | jq -r '.content' | base64 -d > /tmp/refarch_templates_package.json
# Compare Prettier related configurations
echo "=== Prettier Scripts Comparison ==="
jq -r '.scripts | with_entries(select(.key | contains("lint") or contains("fix")))' /tmp/refarch_templates_package.json
echo "=== Prettier Dependencies Comparison ==="
jq -r '.devDependencies | with_entries(select(.key | contains("prettier")))' /tmp/refarch_templates_package.json
Length of output: 603 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Let's try using rg to find Prettier related configurations in both repos
echo "=== Searching for package.json files ==="
fd package.json
echo -e "\n=== Current repo's package.json content ==="
cat docs/package.json
echo -e "\n=== Searching for Prettier configurations ==="
fd "\.prettierrc|prettier\.config\.js"
Length of output: 799 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Check the contents of node_modules to verify the prettier configuration
echo "=== Checking for Prettier configuration in dependencies ==="
# First, check if the package is installed and its contents
ls -la node_modules/@muenchen/prettier-codeformat 2>/dev/null || echo "Package not found in node_modules"
# Let's also check the root directory for any Prettier configuration that might extend the package
echo -e "\n=== Checking root for Prettier configuration ==="
ls -la .prettierrc* prettier.config.* 2>/dev/null || echo "No Prettier config found in root"
# Finally, let's check the docs directory specifically
echo -e "\n=== Checking docs directory for Prettier configuration ==="
ls -la docs/.prettierrc* docs/prettier.config.* 2>/dev/null || echo "No Prettier config found in docs"
Length of output: 812 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Check the content of the Prettier configuration
echo "=== Prettier Configuration Content ==="
cat docs/.prettierrc
Length of output: 141 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
github-actions
bot
added
Type: Bug
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
docs/.vitepress/theme/style.css (1)
10-14: Consider alternative approaches to !important declarationsWhile the footer styling achieves the desired effect, using
!importantmight indicate specificity issues in the cascade. Consider:
- Increasing selector specificity
- Reviewing the base theme's footer implementation
- Using more specific selectors to avoid
!importantAdditionally, verify if such a high z-index (100) is necessary, as it might cause issues with other positioned elements.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
docs/.vitepress/theme/logo-lhm.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
docs/.vitepress/config.mts(2 hunks)docs/.vitepress/theme/LhmThemeExtension.vue(1 hunks)docs/.vitepress/theme/style.css(1 hunks)docs/gateway.md(1 hunks)docs/overview.md(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
- docs/overview.md
- docs/gateway.md
- docs/.vitepress/theme/LhmThemeExtension.vue
🔇 Additional comments (4)
docs/.vitepress/theme/style.css (2)
1-8: Well-structured theme implementation!
The CSS variables for logo filtering are well-organized with clear comments. The dark mode implementation follows best practices for theme switching.
16-27: Good mobile responsiveness implementation!
The mobile adjustments are well-implemented with clear comments. The logo handling is appropriate for smaller screens.
Verify if 450px is the optimal breakpoint for your use case:
✅ Verification successful
Let's try a different approach to find CSS files and search for breakpoints. The previous command might have failed due to file pattern matching issues. This command first finds all CSS and SCSS files using fd and then searches within them using rg.
Let's verify the existence of CSS files and the structure of the theme directory, as the previous commands didn't yield any results. This will help us understand if we're dealing with the correct paths and files.
Now that we've confirmed the existence and location of style.css, let's examine its content to understand the full context of breakpoints used in the theme.
450px breakpoint is appropriate for this specific use case
The breakpoint of 450px is the only one defined in the theme's CSS and is specifically used for handling the logo's mobile view. This is a reasonable width for hiding the logo text on very small screens while preserving the icon, as:
- It's a focused, single-purpose breakpoint for logo handling
- The implementation uses standard mobile-first responsive design practices
- No other conflicting breakpoints exist in the theme's CSS
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other breakpoints in the codebase for consistency
rg -g '*.css' -g '*.scss' "max-width:"
Length of output: 187
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other breakpoints in the codebase using a more comprehensive approach
fd -e css -e scss | xargs rg "max-width"
Length of output: 40
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's first check what CSS files exist in the repository
fd -e css -e scss
# Then specifically look at the VitePress theme directory
ls -la docs/.vitepress/theme/
Length of output: 345
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the content of style.css to see all breakpoints
cat docs/.vitepress/theme/style.css
Length of output: 705
docs/.vitepress/config.mts (2)
34-34: Consistent sidebar terminology update!
The sidebar change maintains consistency with the navigation update.
49-51: Good documentation structure enhancement!
Setting outline level to "deep" will improve navigation for complex documentation pages.
Let's verify the impact on existing documentation structure:
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the actual content of these markdown files to understand their heading structure better.
Deep outline level configuration is appropriate for the documentation structure
The documentation files show a consistent hierarchical structure with headings up to level 3 (###), making the "deep" outline level setting beneficial for navigation. The overview page and integration docs both follow this pattern, ensuring the configuration will enhance the documentation browsing experience without causing any issues.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for markdown files with multiple heading levels
rg -l "^#{3,}" --type md
Length of output: 351
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the heading structure of the markdown files
# Focus on docs/overview.md since it's in the docs directory where the config change is made
echo "=== Content of docs/overview.md ==="
rg "^#{1,}" docs/overview.md -A 1
echo -e "\n=== Sample check of one integration doc for comparison ==="
rg "^#{1,}" refarch-integrations/refarch-s3-integration/README.md -A 1
Length of output: 674
Description
Fix template css, unify configuration with refarch-templates and cleanup.
Reference
See it-at-m/refarch-templates#656
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Style
Documentation