Skip to content
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

Create a table for badges in README #44569

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 12, 2022

Conversation

Saransh-cpp
Copy link
Contributor

This makes the README file a bit more organized. I did not create a new issue for this as the change was very minor, and this PR can be easily closed if the maintainers don't want this change. I can also add other badges (for instance, the communication channels) if required!

Please let me know if any changes are required!

Before:

image

Now:

image

@ViralBShah
Copy link
Member

ViralBShah commented Mar 11, 2022

Thanks for the PR and welcome to the Julia project. While visually this feels nicer to the eye, the extra column headings and such are a bit distracting.

@ViralBShah ViralBShah added the domain:docs This change adds or pertains to documentation label Mar 11, 2022
@KristofferC
Copy link
Sponsor Member

I think the header is a bit excessive, it is quite obvious that the badges represent the badges (status) and that the text represents what "type" of badge.

@oscardssmith
Copy link
Member

I like the alignment this adds, but I agree the header seems unnecessary.

@oscardssmith
Copy link
Member

also, just so you know, PRs never need corresponding issues.

@Saransh-cpp
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the quick review, @ViralBShah, @KristofferC, and @oscardssmith!

it is quite obvious that the badges represent the badges

Yes, makes sense.

GitHub's markdown does not support tables without the header. I can do something like this with GitHub's markdown (notice the empty, thin header) -

Documentation Badge
Continuous integration Badge
Code coverage Badge Badge

Fortunately, GitHub's markdown also supports plain HTML. The following HTML -

<table>
    <tr>
        <td>Documentation</td>
        <td>
            <a href="https://docs.julialang.org"><img src='https://img.shields.io/badge/docs-v1-blue.svg'/></a>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>Continuous integration</td>
        <td>
            <a href="https://buildkite.com/julialang/julia-master"><img src='https://badge.buildkite.com/f28e0d28b345f9fad5856ce6a8d64fffc7c70df8f4f2685cd8.svg?branch=master'/></a>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>Code coverage</td>
        <td>
            <a href="https://coveralls.io/r/JuliaLang/julia?branch=master"><img src='https://img.shields.io/coveralls/github/JuliaLang/julia/master.svg?label=coveralls'/></a> <a href="https://codecov.io/github/JuliaLang/julia?branch=master"><img src='https://img.shields.io/codecov/c/github/JuliaLang/julia/master.svg?label=codecov'/></a>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table>

Results in -

Documentation
Continuous integration
Code coverage

But initializing URLs separately, like they are done right now, does not work with HTML here.

Should I replace the markdown content with HTML, or should I leave an empty, thin (or of the same size) header?

welcome to the Julia project

Thanks! :)

also, just so you know, PRs never need corresponding issues.

Oh, I'll keep that in mind!

@ViralBShah
Copy link
Member

Let's replace the markdown with html.

@ViralBShah
Copy link
Member

ViralBShah commented Mar 12, 2022

Folks - the code coverage stuff seems quite a bit old (2 months). Should we remove? Or will these be reinstated at some point?

@DilumAluthge
Copy link
Member

We'll be turning the code coverage Buildkite back on soon: JuliaCI/julia-buildkite#54

@ViralBShah ViralBShah merged commit 2cba553 into JuliaLang:master Mar 12, 2022
@Saransh-cpp Saransh-cpp deleted the table_for_badges branch March 12, 2022 17:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
domain:docs This change adds or pertains to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants