Initial pretext conversion #359
Conversation
|
I would love to take the next step with converting to Pretext. I think merging, either to main or a new branch would be the next step? |
|
Since all of the pretext files are in the pretext folder, we can have parallel source trees on master. Here are the challenges that we face that I would like some comment on.
If no hand fixing has been done, then re-running the converter is not really a problem. However if there has been some manual fixing of converter shortfalls then re-running gets trickier. The sooner we can answer these questions and get on a path to calling PreTeXt the one true source for this book, the easier it will be. |
|
I think Steve Oney and I can get our pending changes to .rst files PR'ed in
the next few days. So, if the converter is going to be re-run it would be
great if you could hold off until then.
There's one other wrinkle. We have additional material in the custom branch
of my fork of the repository. If we correctly followed our plans for this,
that branch should have only *additional* chapters and subchapters, not
edits to any of the material that is in the main repository. If there is
going to be an effort to make the .rst to pretext conversion and thereafter
do all editing in pretext, I'd like to get some help in converting over our
extra chapters and subchapters.
…On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 9:15 AM Bradley Miller ***@***.***> wrote:
Since all of the pretext files are in the pretext folder, we can have
parallel source trees on master. Here are the challenges that we face that
I would like some comment on.
1. This PR is not a complete conversion. I'm not even sure. if it
includes an initial conversion of all chapters? I think so but maybe
@cfcurtis <https://github.com/cfcurtis> can clarify.
2. I'm also not clear on how much, if any, hand fixing @cfcurtis
<https://github.com/cfcurtis> and company have done on the files in
this PR.
3. @presnick <https://github.com/presnick> and company have changes
they are preparing to PR to the rst source. I don't know how extensive
those are or how much trouble it would be to manually apply those changes
to the converted PreTeXt.
If no hand fixing has been done, then re-running the converter is not
really a problem. However if there has been some manual fixing of converter
shortfalls then re-running gets trickier.
The sooner we can answer these questions and get on a path to calling
PreTeXt the one true source for this book, the easier it will be.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#359 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIG7TUHIOAIZVSEUHUCANTXUYV6FANCNFSM6AAAAAAZNZM4BI>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Converting additional materials should not be too bad. You can run the conversion script on individual chapters or pages. |
|
@bnmnetp It's been a while so I don't remember too much, but I don't think there was a lot of hand fixing. I did create placeholder files for the ones that failed to convert so that the TOC references didn't need to be changed, but not a lot more (maybe some of the pretext configuration stuff was done manually?). I wouldn't be offended if you wanted to just reject this PR and start with a fresh version, especially after significant RST changes :) |
|
I have just pushed all of Steve and my changes as a set of PRs to
RunestoneInteracdtive.
After those are accepted, if Oscar wants to take a crack at converting to
PreText, we can treat any further changes as something that we will do in
PreText.
…On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 11:44 AM Charlotte Curtis ***@***.***> wrote:
@bnmnetp <https://github.com/bnmnetp> It's been a while so I don't
remember too much, but I don't think there was a lot of hand fixing. I did
create placeholder files for the ones that failed to convert so that the
TOC references didn't need to be changed, but not a lot more (maybe some of
the pretext configuration stuff was done manually?).
I wouldn't be offended if you wanted to just reject this PR and start with
a fresh version, especially after significant RST changes :)
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#359 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIG7TSK6ZTOHKPCH7TXOTTXUZHPRANCNFSM6AAAAAAZNZM4BI>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Thanks @cfcurtis I just merged a bunch of nice updates from @presnick and @soney. @oscarlevin I think you should run the conversion from this point, and I'll close this PR. Happy to schedule a mini hackathon to help with the conversion. If that would be useful. Otherwise proceed at your own pace and let me know if you run into problems. Brad |
|
@bnmnetp, that sounds good to me. Let me see if I can figure things out, and I'll reach out if I have questions. |
4 participants
I've copied over what I can from our version's conversion. Since more work needs to be done before this is ready for deployment, it should probably be merged into a new branch instead of master.
Known issues: