Open
Conversation
Member
Author
|
After reading the announcement blog post properly today, I'm curious how this might help our code-level documentation. Last year, when using Administrate on a more involved application, I referred to the code docs frequently, so I'm hopeful it'll be helpful. If I run it against the project with that configuration, we get a lot of warnings and errors, which is going to be a bit of a journey to fix: Details
|
We've long had YARD setup for code-level documentation, but without a linter it's quite hard to know if we're using it at all, let along doing a good job of it. Last year, YARD-Lint was published and it's worth trying out to see if it'll work well for us. The hope is that by using GitHub Actions, we'll expand the existing code level docs and be able to verify along the way if they're useful for people. This takes the default configuration at the time of committing (which finds a lot of errors). We run it in a new linting workflow, but only comparing to `main`. https://mensfeld.pl/2025/11/yard-lint-ruby-documentation-linter/ https://github.com/mensfeld/yard-lint
nickcharlton
force-pushed
the
nc-introduce-yard-lint
branch
from
d99997c to
509534e
Compare
Member
Author
|
|
Collaborator
|
Memory of how CI is setup fails me, but: should yarn-lint be included in Appraisal gemfiles at all? It doesn't affect runtime, and it's there only for a task that should be independent of the version of Rails. |
Member
Author
|
I think what happened here is that Appraisal has picked it up because it's part of the Gemfile. An alternative approach would be to just do it in Actions, and no include it in the dependencies at all. What do you think? |
Collaborator
|
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We've long had YARD setup for code-level documentation, but without a linter it's quite hard to know if we're using it at all, let along doing a good job of it.
Last year, YARD-Lint was published and it's worth trying out to see if it'll work well for us. The hope is that by using GitHub Actions, we'll expand the existing code level docs and be able to verify along the way if they're useful for people.
This takes the default configuration at the time of committing (which finds a lot of errors). We run it in a new linting workflow, but only comparing to
main.https://mensfeld.pl/2025/11/yard-lint-ruby-documentation-linter/ https://github.com/mensfeld/yard-lint