Skip to content

make it easier to use a different default theme #4278

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 1, 2018

Conversation

xrmx
Copy link
Contributor

@xrmx xrmx commented Jun 20, 2018

This is for discussion more than inclusion. If this is sound we may want to do the same for default extensions. Our goal is to avoid the conf.py entirely in the documentation repos or make it very slim.

@xrmx xrmx force-pushed the extendconfpyctx branch from b0aa489 to d997818 Compare June 26, 2018 08:00
Copy link
Member

@ericholscher ericholscher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks like a reasonable change. I agree the theme should be set by a string that's passed in, instead of hard-coded. We'd want this to be configurable by a setting though, if we actually wanted it to be easily changed.

@xrmx xrmx force-pushed the extendconfpyctx branch from d997818 to 96a4b94 Compare June 26, 2018 13:43
@xrmx
Copy link
Contributor Author

xrmx commented Jun 26, 2018

Updated PR, haven't touched settings because we can update the context via the finalize_sphinx_context_data signal.

@xrmx xrmx changed the title RFC: make it easier to use a different default theme make it easier to use a different default theme Jun 26, 2018
@xrmx
Copy link
Contributor Author

xrmx commented Jul 18, 2018

ping

@humitos
Copy link
Member

humitos commented Aug 15, 2018

Thanks for your PR.

We'd want this to be configurable by a setting though, if we actually wanted it to be easily changed.

I suppose this is the only thing missing to be in a "ready to merge" state.

@humitos humitos added the PR: work in progress Pull request is not ready for full review label Aug 15, 2018
@xrmx
Copy link
Contributor Author

xrmx commented Aug 16, 2018

@humitos can we please merge this as is and if someone want to expose this with a setting just do another PR? I don't have much bandwidth to work on this and I think the code duplication reduction is worth on its own.

@RichardLitt
Copy link
Member

That might be a good 'Good First Issue' to open, too.

@ericholscher
Copy link
Member

Tested this locally and it works well. Agreed the duplication is reason enough, and it can be changed via signal. 👍

@ericholscher ericholscher merged commit e35e5ff into readthedocs:master Nov 1, 2018
@xrmx
Copy link
Contributor Author

xrmx commented Nov 2, 2018

@ericholscher thank you very much for skimming these old PRs, much appreciated

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
PR: work in progress Pull request is not ready for full review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants