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

Revise and automate docs with sphinx and host on readthedocs #271

Closed
lukpueh opened this issue Sep 11, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #622
Closed

Revise and automate docs with sphinx and host on readthedocs #271

lukpueh opened this issue Sep 11, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #622
Milestone

Comments

@lukpueh
Copy link
Member

lukpueh commented Sep 11, 2020

Description of issue or feature request:
Revise docstrings of API functions regarding contents and format (use Google Style docstring as suggested in secure-systems-lab/code-style-guidelines#20), akin to what in-toto did in in-toto/in-toto#369.

Needs coordination with #270

Current behavior:

  • No clear API
  • Docstrings use custom secure systems lab format

Expected behavior:

@lukpueh lukpueh added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Sep 11, 2020
@lukpueh lukpueh mentioned this issue Feb 18, 2021
3 tasks
@MVrachev
Copy link
Collaborator

Please note that when we update the docstrings of API functions we should update the
documentation regarding the securesystemslib.keys.create_signature() and the following comment

# Continue to support keytypes of ecdsa-sha2-nistp256 and ecdsa-sha2-nistp384

because we are not actually supporting ecdsa-sha2-nistp384.
If you read securesystemslib.ecdsa_keys.create_signature():
def create_signature(public_key, private_key, data, scheme='ecdsa-sha2-nistp256'):

you will see we support only support ecdsa-sha2-nistp256.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants