Skip to content

HLS needs a website! #2033

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

Closed
fendor opened this issue Jul 22, 2021 · 9 comments · Fixed by #2083
Closed

HLS needs a website! #2033

fendor opened this issue Jul 22, 2021 · 9 comments · Fixed by #2083
Labels
old_type: meta Planing and organizing other issues

Comments

@fendor
Copy link
Collaborator

fendor commented Jul 22, 2021

Good morning everyone!

While I don't really think we need additional motivation, here are some reasons why we need a website:

Structure
HLS's README is quite overflowing, presenting itself, showing off features, installation guides, how to debug issues, configuration, how to get started with developing, etc...

All in one file! That is too much to stomach for most people, a website can bring structure into this mess, help with orientation and so on.

News and blog posts
If we have any news regarding IDE development, there is nothing to post that to! Someone has to write a text and post it to all relevant news sites (e.g. discourse, reddit, Hackernews (no idea whether anyone posts there actually)) and so on. It would be simpler if there was a news section on the website, where people can write news and blog posts that can be easily reviewed! Additionally, it serves as an archive of what we have announced already.

Documentation
Some plugins are non-trivial to use. Writing documentation in a readme is not the most discoverable way of advertising said features. On a website, we can have dedicated tutorials, not buried somewhere in the repository.


I think it is worth having a website dedicated to the Haskell Language Server!

@jneira jneira added the old_type: meta Planing and organizing other issues label Jul 22, 2021
@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Jul 22, 2021

It is a nice idea, but a website... has to be maintained. It could be setup as github pages or we could open the project wiki.
Other alternative is create md docs in the documentation folder.

@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Jul 22, 2021

As a POC i've published the docs folder in https://haskell.github.io/haskell-language-server, as it has not index.html it throws a 404 but you can download the md files, f.e. https://haskell.github.io/haskell-language-server/plugin-tutorial.md

@googleson78
Copy link
Contributor

Something in the style of readthedocs perhaps? (like ghc and agda currently do)

@konn
Copy link
Collaborator

konn commented Jul 22, 2021

I strongly agree!
As a marginal note: I had even proposed it once as a Discussion: #1319 but it got silently rejected at that time.
As HLS has been evolving since then, the presence of the dedicated documentation/frontpage makes much more sence than the past.

@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Jul 22, 2021

Well if we can reorganize and polish docs folder and they are automatically (or only adding the link in a index page) published in https://haskell.github.io/haskell-language-server the work to maintain maybe worths it, as we will have a good docs folder and a page with those docs

@michaelpj
Copy link
Collaborator

+1 for readthedocs, I have found it very good.

@Ailrun
Copy link
Member

Ailrun commented Jul 26, 2021

one more +1 for readthedocs, it's quite maintainable in my exprience.

@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Jul 27, 2021

I like readthedocs too so prs welcome to add them, in this repo if possible

@michaelpj
Copy link
Collaborator

I opened a PR with an initial setup for RTD: #2083

@mergify mergify bot closed this as completed in #2083 Aug 11, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
old_type: meta Planing and organizing other issues
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants