Conversation
|
Can we experiment with using https://pypi.org/project/sphinx-tabs/ or https://pypi.org/project/sphinxcontrib-contentui/ to provide both the |
|
I went with exectuablebooks' sphinx-tabs, as I'm a Jupyterbook fan. (https://henryiii.github.io/level-up-your-python ;) ), and it likely is well maintained. Here's what the current state looks like:
|
di
left a comment
di
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some small suggestions but otherwise this looks great.
Co-authored-by: Dustin Ingram <[email protected]>
di
left a comment
di
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, will give it a day or so to let other folks review as well before merging.
|
May I suggest using sphinx-inline-tabs instead? I think it looks nicer. :) |
|
Oh, look at that! Very nice @pradyunsg. Does it support markup in the tab title? |
|
I'll try it soon! :) |
|
No, it doesn't, though it seems to try harder:
|
|
I'll push a version that uses this:
|
|
@henryiii instead of posting the image it's better to post the link to the rendered document, e.g. https://python-packaging-user-guide--818.org.readthedocs.build/tutorials/packaging-projects/#configuring-metadata |
|
The link is available already, "Details" on the readthedocs check. Putting an image in shows what it looks like without having to click a link, and once I've changed it, you only see the new version with a link, so you can't compare. Though I could have made the image clickable, I suppose :) |
That link takes you to the main page, not the section you want to view the change rendered. It's nice to have a direct link available 😄 |
|
Thanks @henryiii! |
|
FYI, sphinx-tabs now supports rst in tab headings, including math. executablebooks/sphinx-tabs#102 |
|
Hey @Bfox85, this sort of drive-through reviews is rather useless and is considered spam. Please use words if you have something meaningful to add here. |
It does now! |
5 participants
Followup to #817, related to #809.
I've split out the setup.cfg changes. I still would highly recommend setup.cfg, because:
[options]or in[metadata]or in ...While I'm really excited for PEP 621 support, that's quite some time away (looks like funding has not even been secured yet), and then there's another period for the tooling to mature and become common enough to be used, it won't ever support Python 2 / PyPy 2, etc, so I expect adoption to be slow. And setup.cfg is still not going away, with some tools strongly refusing (cough, flake8, cough cough) to ever add pyproject.toml support (MyPy is still setup.cfg only too).
If people are writing setup.cfg's, it will be much easier to transition to pyproject.toml than from setup.py.