Ecosystem Description Table about techdocs HOT 19 CLOSED

Adding a checklist @daniloff200:

• ergo (@daniloff200)
• cicero (@daniloff200)
• concerto (@daniloff200)
• markdown-transform (@daniloff200)
• markdown-editor (@daniloff200)
• cicero-ui (@daniloff200)
• concerto-ui (@daniloff200)
• template-studio-v2 (@daniloff200)
• cicero-vscode-extension (@daniloff200)
• cicero-template-library (@daniloff200)
• models (@daniloff200)
• techdocs (@daniloff200)

from techdocs.

techdocs actually already fixed and merged, we're in this repo now, ahahah 🤣 @irmerk

from techdocs.

@irmerk looks like I've created a PRs for all items from your checklist :) waiting for reviews!

from techdocs.

Hacktoberfest:

This issue can provide for multiple pull requests.

from techdocs.

I can took this one too, but, I have one question: Is it okay If I make table with the same structure, like in vue example, or, we really need a sub heading for each section, like :

Core
Project Status Description
ergo badge some descr
cicero badge some descr

User Interface
Project Status Description
cicero-ui badge some descr
template-studio-v2 badge some descr

Hope, @irmerk , you'll understand, what I've tried to say 🎃

from techdocs.

@daniloff200: I'm pretty sure I understand! I think the option you proposed sounds better, having sub-headings. There are some pretty distinct borders, so that sounds like the right path.

from techdocs.

@jeromesimeon #131 (comment)

In reference to this, I don't think we expect our ecosystem to change so often that this would be hard to maintain - I think it would take little to no maintenance.

from techdocs.

@jeromesimeon #131 (comment)

In reference to this, I don't think we expect our ecosystem to change so often that this would be hard to maintain - I think it would take little to no maintenance.

We re-publish those things quite often. I just want to make sure we do not add too much extra work for this.

When things change, if those aren't maintained this will confuse users more rather than less.

(I think this was the same idea when we added DEVELOPER.md etc to every project, and obviously we have tons of inconsistencies across those and have to fix typos in all the different places).

from techdocs.

I agree with @irmerk, I don't think that new modules / libraries will appear every release.
If you're confused because of version badge, that should be updated automatically, I suppose

from techdocs.

We re-publish those things quite often. I just want to make sure we do not add too much extra work for this.

Does this change the way the ecosystem is shaped? If auto generating this from one source is possible, then we can just do that.

I think later in October or post Hacktoberfest, having one task be to sync all DEVELOPERS files again isn't too onerous.

from techdocs.

Based on the latest response (#131 (comment)), I was thinking of this to look more like this (#131 (comment)) and this (#131 (comment)).

Where does this stand @jeromesimeon?

from techdocs.

@irmerk I got your point, I personally more like these two options, then how I made it now, but, it was per #131 (comment) this . Let's wait for feedback from Jerome !

from techdocs.

This issue will be the tracker for all PRs in other repos. Make sure to link to this when creating more PRs @daniloff200

from techdocs.

Nice, thank you for all the consistency and thoroughness!

from techdocs.

There are already discrepencies between some of those tables in different projects. e.g., between Concerto: https://github.com/accordproject/concerto/blob/master/README.md and Cicero: https://github.com/accordproject/cicero/blob/master/README.md

Which is the most recent version?

from techdocs.

@jeromesimeon ohhhh my god!
That was a missclick ! And that was only in one repo: in Cicero.
I missed concerto-ui there. Gonna create a fix right now.

In all other repos, tables are exactly the same

from techdocs.

Well, I see, that I failed a little bit, and link to markdown editor package is broken in every repo 😷

Gonna create PRs today in all repos with a fix

from techdocs.

@daniloff200 link them all to this issue and we can review them all at once again.

from techdocs.

Well, looks like that's all
cc @irmerk @jeromesimeon

from techdocs.