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: Improve packages readme #10527

Closed
92 tasks
ajitbohra opened this issue Oct 11, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed
92 tasks

Docs: Improve packages readme #10527

ajitbohra opened this issue Oct 11, 2018 · 6 comments
Labels
[Type] Developer Documentation Documentation for developers [Type] Enhancement A suggestion for improvement. [Type] Task Issues or PRs that have been broken down into an individual action to take

Comments

@ajitbohra
Copy link
Member

ajitbohra commented Oct 11, 2018

Packages need better readme to be descriptive and informative for clarity.

Some packages readmes are oneliner or missing details.

Ref #10510 (comment)

cc: @chrisvanpatten

Packages Checklist:

  • a11y
  • api-fetch
  • autop
  • babel-plugin-import-jsx-pragma
  • babel-plugin-makepot
  • babel-preset-default
  • blob
  • block-library
  • blocks
  • block-serialization-default-parser
  • block-serialization-spec-parser
  • browserslist-config
  • components
  • compose
  • core-data
  • custom-templated-path-webpack-plugin
  • data
  • date
  • deprecated
  • dom
  • dom-ready
  • editor
  • edit-post
  • element
  • a11y
  • api-fetch
  • autop
  • babel-plugin-import-jsx-pragma
  • babel-plugin-makepot
  • babel-preset-default
  • blob
  • block-library
  • blocks
  • block-serialization-default-parser
  • block-serialization-spec-parser
  • browserslist-config
  • components
  • compose
  • core-data
  • custom-templated-path-webpack-plugin
  • data
  • date
  • deprecated
  • dom
  • dom-ready
  • editor
  • edit-post
  • element
  • escape-html
  • hooks
  • html-entities
  • i18n
  • is-shallow-equal
  • jest-console
  • jest-preset-default
  • keycodes
  • library-export-default-webpack-plugin
  • list-reusable-blocks
  • npm-package-json-lint-config
  • nux
  • plugins
  • postcss-themes
  • redux-routine
  • rich-text
  • scripts
  • shortcode
  • token-list
  • url
  • viewport
  • wordcount
  • escape-html
  • hooks
  • html-entities
  • i18n
  • is-shallow-equal
  • jest-console
  • jest-preset-default
  • keycodes
  • library-export-default-webpack-plugin
  • list-reusable-blocks
  • npm-package-json-lint-config
  • nux
  • plugins
  • postcss-themes
  • redux-routine
  • rich-text
  • scripts
  • shortcode
  • token-list
  • url
  • viewport
  • wordcount

Audit Checklist:

  • A detailed description of the package
  • Simple installation instructions (npm install @wordpress/components --save)
  • Usage instructions for ES5 and ES6, or links to appropriate sub-readmes if necessary
@ajitbohra ajitbohra added [Type] Task Issues or PRs that have been broken down into an individual action to take [Type] Enhancement A suggestion for improvement. [Type] Developer Documentation Documentation for developers labels Oct 11, 2018
@ajitbohra ajitbohra added this to the Documentation & Handbook milestone Oct 11, 2018
@chrisvanpatten
Copy link
Contributor

@ajitbohra A good starting point for this might be to create a list of the packages as a checkbox list, and also come up with standards to audit the readmes/descriptions.

I think as a baseline, each package should meet the following criteria:

  • Simple, readable package description, explaining the broad purpose of the package
  • Readme containing…
    • More detailed description of the package
    • Simple installation instructions (npm install @wordpress/components --save and ES2015 instructions)
    • Usage instructions for ES5 and ES6, or links to appropriate sub-readmes if necessary

I know @tofumatt has many good opinions on documentation and might have additional criteria for us to consider.

@tofumatt
Copy link
Member

I frankly think ES5 instructions aren't really worth it, but I'm not sure if that's official WordPress policy 😄

Those sound like a great start to me, not much to add. Only thing is how usable they even are outside WordPress and what the intended audience is for each package. Some are better supported outside of a WordPress context and some are just packages whose target is WordPress. It's worth explicitly saying so to set expectation of support, see:
#10429 (review)

I'd definitely like to see this.

@chrisvanpatten
Copy link
Contributor

@tofumatt That's actually a good point — if you're consuming the packages via npm it may be safe to assume that you have an ES6/webpack setup, especially because the scripts themselves use ES6 and need to be transpiled anyway.

ES5 examples are important in the editor documentation, but not so much in the README that we push to npm.

@tofumatt
Copy link
Member

And they definitely bloat the docs, which can be scary for those (like me) that often skim docs of new packages rather than read them thoroughly at first. 😅

@ajitbohra
Copy link
Member Author

Agree with @tofumatt less is more, same here I often skim docs 😅

@chrisvanpatten that checklist looks good for audit will add the checkbox checklist of the packages. Will try to split out the list into two one with content which needs to be reviewed structured which you can have a look at. Another list with the packages that need content will add the rough draft and you can cover me on the copy my writing skills suck 😅

@mkaz
Copy link
Member

mkaz commented Mar 8, 2019

I'm closing this one out, per all the work @nosolosw has done here: #14227

@mkaz mkaz closed this as completed Mar 8, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[Type] Developer Documentation Documentation for developers [Type] Enhancement A suggestion for improvement. [Type] Task Issues or PRs that have been broken down into an individual action to take
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants