Moving documentation that is not specific to phys2bids here

[sangfrois]

docs moved :

• phys2bids/docs/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.rst became physiopy/docs/community/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
• phys2bids/docs/contributorfile.rsr became physiopy/docs/community/contributorfile.md
• phys2bids/docs/bestpractices.rst became physiopy/docs/community/best-practices.md

I used pandoc to translate, e.g. while just outside both repo
pandoc git/phys2bids/docs/bestpractice.rst -f rst -t markdown -o git/physiopy/docs/community/best-practices.md

I'm creating an issue in phys2bids so that folks can discuss what should be removed from phys2bids documentation, following this.

Small PRs towards BIG CHANGES

Obviously, this reorganization has to be done in multiple PRs. Let me outline some things I thought about :

• Include a brief description of the community in docs/index.md

• Include redirection to each library in libraries/*.md

• Include versions and releases details under devs/

• Include a section on electrodermal activity in community/best-practices.md

Also :

I tried running mkdocs serve to run the thing locally and got errors related to my environment. I didn't to clobber it on a friday afternoon (...again) so I'm stopping here.

[eurunuela]

LGTM! I wonder if we should expand on the types of contributions in another PR 🤔 the ones we have are quite programming-oriented.

[smoia]

Question: how can we see the rendered files?

[sangfrois]

@smoia I am clueless to be honest. First time I work on a GitHub.io website.

I didn't build anything.

[eurunuela]

I didn't manage to build locally. I got some errors I still have to go through.

[smoia]

Ok, let me know when you figured it out! I'd like to see it before approving! 😉

[eurunuela]

Ok, let me know when you figured it out! I'd like to see it before approving! 😉

I managed to run it locally. Apparently, I tried installing the plugins on my own and one of them (the toc-sidebar plugin) has a bug. If you pip install -r requirements.txt you will not have the issue.

Dp mkdocs serve to see live changes on your browser or mkdocs build to build the site locally.

[eurunuela]

Hey @sangfrois , I was able to build locally and I see we have some issues.

Basically, we have to point to the correct filenames in mkdocs.yml. I can also see one last reference to niPreps on this same file. We're also missing the contributing.md in the nav.

For contributorfile.md we're gonna have to update the way we write titles for the TOC to work. The titles in the code of conduct are correct, you can use them as a reference.

We're missing the best practices page in the nav too.

We should probably remove the New features page.

[sangfrois]

• mkdocs.yml points to correct path
• contributing.md is in navbar
• removed docs/libraries/singularity.md
• removed New Features page

I did not know what you meant by changing the titles in contributorfile.md @eurunuela ; Do you mean the links embedded in the titles ?

Also, I can't build it eventhough I have all the dependencies. So I'm kind of blind here.
AttributeError: module 'mkdocs.utils' has no attribute 'string_types'

[eurunuela]

I did not know what you meant by changing the titles in contributorfile.md @eurunuela ; Do you mean the links embedded in the titles ?

You will need to build the pages to see what I mean. Basically, they do not appear on the table of contents on the right-hand side. My guess is it's related to the Markdown styling you used (maybe coming from the pandoc command).

Also, I can't build it eventhough I have all the dependencies. So I'm kind of blind here.
AttributeError: module 'mkdocs.utils' has no attribute 'string_types'

Did you pip install the requirements.txt file? If you look in to the file, we must use a specific version of mkdocs that has the patch for this error.

[sangfrois]

@eurunuela my environment was clobbered and now I'm on a linux machine and everything works fine 💯
I had ran pip install -r requirements.txt and things didn't work on my Windows machine.

Now, I see that links are working properly and Table of Contents are generated automatically. The pandocs command I ran didn't translate links properly so I had to change them manually (from the beggining).

It translated to :
Some title {#some link}

So I had to change it like this :
[Some title](#some link)

[sangfrois]

@smoia I would suggest we merge this and plan with all the physiopy folks (in our next meeting) what to add next. Does that make any sense to you ?

[eurunuela]

Wait, I thought we'd have an introductory page with the link to the "real" phys2bids documentation in it.

[sangfrois]

Yeah, well I gave it a try. Sorry, i didn't mention that in my comments. I was thinking of suggesting we describe libraries in the Home index.md

[sangfrois]

we can still change it before merging

[eurunuela]

Yeah, well I gave it a try. Sorry, i didn't mention that in my comments. I was thinking of suggesting we describe libraries in the Home index.md

That's a good option too. I like the idea. Then the tabs will direct to the "real" docs of each package. I like it!

[eurunuela]

@smoia I would suggest we merge this and plan with all the physiopy folks (in our next meeting) what to add next. Does that make any sense to you ?

I think that's the most sensible step forward right now. Once the structure is set, any contributor can open a PR for a specific page in the docs for example.

[eurunuela]

@eurunuela my environment was clobbered and now I'm on a linux machine and everything works fine 💯
I had ran pip install -r requirements.txt and things didn't work on my Windows machine.

Now, I see that links are working properly and Table of Contents are generated automatically. The pandocs command I ran didn't translate links properly so I had to change them manually (from the beggining).

It translated to :
Some title {#some link}

So I had to change it like this :
[Some title](#some link)

That's what I thought, something was wrong with the installation. Thank you so much!

[eurunuela]

@smoia I would suggest we merge this and plan with all the physiopy folks (in our next meeting) what to add next. Does that make any sense to you ?

I think that's the most sensible step forward right now. Once the structure is set, any contributor can open a PR for a specific page in the docs for example.

What's your take on this @smoia ? Shall we merge already?

[vinferrer]

@eurunuela is there a decision on merging?

[eurunuela]

@eurunuela is there a decision on merging?

I'd merge now... okay, let me make sure it looks right one last time and I'll merge!

[eurunuela]

I think once I commit the suggestion we're good to go.