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

doc: remove duplicate outdated docs #1769

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 14, 2022

Conversation

lukpueh
Copy link
Member

@lukpueh lukpueh commented Jan 13, 2022

Fixes #-

Description of the changes being introduced by the pull request:
These documents are also hosted on our website and in a better shape too (kudos to @jhdalek55!). There is no need to maintain outdated duplicates.

This patch removes the documents and updates references as needed.

Note, the full history of these docs can be tracked in the old archived website repo and in the new one (filenames may vary in case and extension):

old: https://github.com/theupdateframework/theupdateframework.github.io
new: https://github.com/theupdateframework/theupdateframework.io/tree/master/content

Please verify and check that the pull request fulfills the following
requirements
:

  • The code follows the Code Style Guidelines
  • Tests have been added for the bug fix or new feature
  • Docs have been added for the bug fix or new feature

These documents are also hosted on our website and in a better
shape too (kudos to @jhdalek55!). There is no need to maintain
outdated duplicates.

This patch removes the documents and updates references as needed.

Note, the full history of these docs can be tracked in the old
archived website repo and in the new one (filenames may vary in
case and extension):
old: https://github.com/theupdateframework/theupdateframework.github.io
new: https://github.com/theupdateframework/theupdateframework.io/tree/master/content

Signed-off-by: Lukas Puehringer <lukas.puehringer@nyu.edu>
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1693636531

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 97.688%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 1683264892: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 4097
Relevant Lines: 4178

💛 - Coveralls

Copy link
Contributor

@mnm678 mnm678 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! I agree that we should point people to one set of up-to-date docs

kairoaraujo pushed a commit to kairoaraujo/python-tuf that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2022
This commit is a simple trailing whitespaces cleanup from the files
inside the docs folder.
The files on docs sub-directories are not part of this commit.
The docs/SECURITY.md will be removed on PR theupdateframework#1769

Signed-off-by: Kairo de Araujo <kdearaujo@vmware.com>
Copy link
Member

@jku jku left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with this, looks good to me.

I wonder if we want to be more explicit in naming TUF as the specification (as in reference "TUF specification website" instead of "TUF website") to make the distinction between the projects (python-tuf and TUF) more clear to new readers? Anyway, it's already good ✔️ .

@lukpueh
Copy link
Member Author

lukpueh commented Jan 14, 2022

I wonder if we want to be more explicit in naming TUF as the specification (as in reference "TUF specification website" instead of "TUF website") to make the distinction between the projects (python-tuf and TUF) more clear to new readers?

IMO it's okay as it is because python-tuf is the official TUF reference implementation, which makes it less of an autonomous project than other TUF implementations. 🤷

@lukpueh lukpueh merged commit 4f6e617 into theupdateframework:develop Jan 14, 2022
@jku
Copy link
Member

jku commented Jan 14, 2022

I was more worried about confusion of type "a link to TUF website when I'm already on the TUF website, that's just silly" -- but I agree it's pretty clear

lukpueh added a commit to lukpueh/peps that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2022
In preparation for the 1.0.0** release of the TUF reference
implementation `python-tuf` documentation referenced in this PEP is
being moved. This patch updates the corresponding links in the PEP.

** See https://github.com/theupdateframework/python-tuf/blob/059bfda391893a7e502ed3da5a185ab174e977dc/docs/1.0.0-ANNOUNCEMENT.md

More specifically, the following link changes are performed:

- METADATA.md
  to: metadata format section in TUF spec
  Note: alternatively this could link to the new location of
  METADATA.md (see theupdateframework/python-tuf#1769), but the spec
  seems like a better resource

- TUTORIAL.md#repo-management
  to: new metadata API doc on readthedocs and new repo
  example/tutorial

- TUTORIAL.md#lazy-bin-walk
  to: new hashed bin delegation example/tutorial

- client implementation
  to: new client doc on readthedocs

Signed-off-by: Lukas Puehringer <lukas.puehringer@nyu.edu>
brettcannon pushed a commit to python/peps that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2022
In preparation for the 1.0.0** release of the TUF reference
implementation `python-tuf` documentation referenced in this PEP is
being moved. This patch updates the corresponding links in the PEP.

** See https://github.com/theupdateframework/python-tuf/blob/059bfda391893a7e502ed3da5a185ab174e977dc/docs/1.0.0-ANNOUNCEMENT.md

More specifically, the following link changes are performed:

- METADATA.md
  to: metadata format section in TUF spec
  Note: alternatively this could link to the new location of
  METADATA.md (see theupdateframework/python-tuf#1769), but the spec
  seems like a better resource

- TUTORIAL.md#repo-management
  to: new metadata API doc on readthedocs and new repo
  example/tutorial

- TUTORIAL.md#lazy-bin-walk
  to: new hashed bin delegation example/tutorial

- client implementation
  to: new client doc on readthedocs

Signed-off-by: Lukas Puehringer <lukas.puehringer@nyu.edu>
@lukpueh lukpueh mentioned this pull request Jan 27, 2022
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 this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants