-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 165
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
pdf version specs #427
pdf version specs #427
Conversation
updated pandon-script.sh adds a - a cover page. cover.tex file uses the bids logo - a header with BIDS version number, however, this isn't automated. The header.tex file needs to be updated for new version release of BIDS specs. - font change is possible. However, the default LaTex font seemed better to me but can be changed with -V mainfont="DejaVu Serif" or any other font. - spacing after 'Quantitative T1rho brain imaging' and before URL on page 21 was modified in the corresponding .md file in the src directory.
merging changes from base repo
- automated header extraction from changelog - removing all internal links from pdf and replacing them with associated plain text - modular script but needs to be cleaned up
merging most recent upstream commits
updating the fork with most recent upstream commits
Apart from formatting and other minor changes, this commit includes an initial edit to the .circleci config file to try and build the pdf alongside circleci build of mkdocs
Final working changes from the following files were imported into this commit: - ./.circleci/config.yml - pdf_build_src/build_pdf.sh - src/04-modality-specific-files/01-magnetic-resonance-imaging-data.md
The rendered pdf can be found under the |
@effigies @yarikoptic @nicholst @franklin-feingold @robertoostenveld I am pinging you because you have been involved in discussions about the PDF generation in the past (please help me to ping those people I forgot). We have gone through several iterations with this PR now with @Arshitha busily fixing bugs and shaping the PR to our requests. There is still a lot to be done (as outlined in the OP above by @Arshitha ) ... but I think we should merge this PR first, because it provides a solid foundation. If you think so too, please review and approve ... disapprove only if you find issues that should definitely not make it into the bids-specification repo ... and then tell us about these issues so we can stay active :-) PS: I tried rebasing this PR and it was hell (I failed for now) ... if somebody else wants to train some git kung fu, please try to rebase this PR and make a new PR that we can merge. Else we can look into making a merge commit --> but I already see several things that'd need to be resolved (see https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/427/files#r384366609). |
@@ -57,7 +73,7 @@ jobs: | |||
working_directory: ~/build | |||
command: | | |||
if (git log -1 --pretty=%s | grep Merge*) && (! git log -1 --pretty=%b | grep REL:) ; then | |||
github_changelog_generator --user bids-standard --project bids-specification --token ${CHANGE_TOKEN} --output ~/build/CHANGES.md --base ~/build/src/pregh-changes.md --header-label Changelog --no-issues --no-issues-wo-labels --no-filter-by-milestone --no-compare-link --pr-label "" | |||
github_changelog_generator --user bids-standard --project bids-specification --token ${CHANGE_TOKEN} --output ~/build/CHANGES.md --base ~/build/src/pregh-changes.md --header-label "# Changelog" --no-issues --no-issues-wo-labels --no-filter-by-milestone --no-compare-link --pr-label "" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am wondering why this line is highlighted as a diff.
In master
, we should have the exact same line:
bids-specification/.circleci/config.yml
Line 60 in 6bd2ad5
github_changelog_generator --user bids-standard --project bids-specification --token ${CHANGE_TOKEN} --output ~/build/CHANGES.md --base ~/build/src/pregh-changes.md --header-label "# Changelog" --no-issues --no-issues-wo-labels --no-filter-by-milestone --no-compare-link --pr-label "" |
... so there shouldn't be a change, actually 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not sure why that's the case. I remember having synced my fork with the latest commits on master, but perhaps I missed something when cherry picking commits from here #400 ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can't comment on the machinery of generating the PDF and integrating it with the repo/website, but I've reviewed the PDF and believe the remaining snags are minor enough and thus it is worthy of merging.
@sappelhoff would it be easier if I were to create a new branch from master and then just add all of the new/changed files to this new branch to create a PR from there? That way, it won't have more than 2-3 commits and therefore, easier to rebase/merge? This PR can then be deleted? |
Also, most of the conflicts to be resolved, if this were to be merged, would be column width adjustments in the markdown files. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thank you @Arshitha for the time and effort put into generating a fantastic pdf of the specification! The pdf looks great!! can iterate on the remaining open issues
thank you @sappelhoff @nicholst @effigies for providing great guidance and shepherding
@Arshitha that's how I would do it ... :-) but we could perhaps also just make a merge commit without rebasing this PR. I am only puzzled by the perhaps @effigies can comment, as he has more git experience. |
@sappelhoff can we go ahead and merge by creating a new PR with only a couple of commits or do we still try rebasing or merging this one? |
@Arshitha I did not resolve the question with the unexpected diff that's showing up (https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/427/files#r384366609). So yes, perhaps it'd be best if you could
I'll be sure to make a quick check then and merge. We have all the reviews (and approvals) we need :-) |
This is a PR almost identical to PR #400 updated-pdf-version-specs except that this has much cleaner commit history and was created to address the issue of unwanted commits in the above referenced PR.
To gain a better understanding of why certain decisions were made while fixing the issue of generating pdf version of the specs, discussions in the following issues would be useful references:
Bugs Fixed:
mkdocs.yml
)Enhancements required (non-exhaustive list):