Skip to content

Documentation Website#151

Draft
douglowe wants to merge 4 commits into
developfrom
122-documentation-website
Draft

Documentation Website#151
douglowe wants to merge 4 commits into
developfrom
122-documentation-website

Conversation

@douglowe
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

This will be a GitHub pages hosted website. Currently just a skeleton setup.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings May 11, 2026 12:20
@douglowe douglowe marked this pull request as draft May 11, 2026 12:20
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Introduces an initial skeleton for a GitHub Pages–hosted documentation website under docs/website-src, using Next.js + Nextra, and adds a GitHub Actions workflow to verify the docs site builds on PRs.

Changes:

  • Added Nextra/Next.js docs site scaffold (config + basic pages).
  • Added initial site navigation metadata and app wrapper.
  • Added a PR workflow to install dependencies and build/upload the Pages artifact.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 8 out of 9 changed files in this pull request and generated 7 comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
docs/website-src/theme.config.tsx Nextra theme configuration for repo links, sidebar, header/footer.
docs/website-src/pages/index.mdx Landing page content scaffold.
docs/website-src/pages/crate_validator.mdx Placeholder page for validator documentation.
docs/website-src/pages/_meta.js Sidebar/page metadata configuration.
docs/website-src/pages/_app.jsx Next.js custom App wrapper.
docs/website-src/package.json Docs site dependencies and scripts.
docs/website-src/next.config.mjs Next.js + Nextra integration and static export settings.
.github/workflows/check.build.docs.yml CI workflow to build (and currently upload) the docs site output.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment thread .github/workflows/check.build.docs.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/workflows/check.build.docs.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/workflows/check.build.docs.yml Outdated
import { useConfig } from 'nextra-theme-docs'

export default {
docsRepositoryBase: 'https://github.com/eScienceLab/Cratey-Validator/tree/main/docs/website',
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
import React from "react";
Comment on lines +15 to +17
head() {
const { frontMatter } = useConfig()

Comment on lines +1 to +3
import { Cards } from 'nextra/components'
import { Steps,Callout } from "nextra/components"

pull_request:

paths:
- "docs/website-src/**"
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could we just have docs/ be the root? there is almost nothing in there and the stuff in docs/assets/ will be useful for the site anyway

Suggested change
- "docs/website-src/**"
- "docs/**"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We probably could - I was following the deployment system for the original docs page, and trying to fit the logic into our filesystem. But, I must admit, I have followed the workflow by rote, rather than considering if we need every step.

In the deployment workflow we have these steps:

      - name: Copy built files to docs
        run: |
          rm -rf docs/website/*
          cp -r docs/website-src/out docs/website

      - name: Upload artifact
        uses: actions/upload-pages-artifact@v3
        with:
          path: docs/website

If we move to using docs rather than docs/website as the root, then perhaps we could get rid of the copy step, and upload directly from the docs/website/out (or, as it would be, docs/out) path?

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, that makes sense to me

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.

Document how to use the Five Safes RO-Crate profile with the validation service

3 participants