Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Ideally what's in InternalDocs/ would be built into the docs.python.org docs .

If you expose internals in documentation, then people depend on internals.

And when you break it, because it isn't meant to be tracked by any kind of API, there are wonderful groups who will sue you (usually under "devaluation").





That's why three different procedures for docs?

Python docs procedures: (0) Devguide, (1) PEPs w/ front matter in RST, (2) RST in /Doc with Sphinx, (3) MD and TXT in /InternalDocs without a toctree

The .. warning: or even admonition directives could be used for indicating that docs under /internals are not public API and can change with or without a PEP; though that should also or at least be indicated in the source unless that's a given expectation that not marked public APIs are not to be considered stable


How many, many times has a project said, "Don't use, internal only", only for it to become an industry-wide common "trick"?

Saying "here be dragons" is not enough to discourage people whose job it is to be creative.


That's the bad kind of lazy.

It is advantageous to format, interlink, and create a table of contents for documentation. I doubt anyone would advocate for removing the Makefile and conf.py from /Doc.

That a document describes something internal does not mean that it should be excluded from the docs.

Is there a consistent standard for whether something is internal or external to the CPython project? Aren't there already internal things documented in /Doc? Should they be removed from the docs build then? Or moved to an internal folder with a DRY additional toctree?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: