Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
What I plan to do in some of my README.md files is provide hyperlinks to other sites that I cite. However, we all run into that problem when links die or get moved, and said link becomes invalidated. =(
Is there a github tool that can run nightly checks to see if all the links in a README.md file (or something similar) are working correctly?
What I'm looking for is something that has a feature similar to Travis CI, where a project could have a badge saying "link-passing" on the project's main github page. (Example: scikit-learn has those two classy looking "build-passing" badges.)
I think what you want to use is awesome_bot.
It doesn't provide the badge you want but it does check URLs in files.
From what I get from your question, Travis is actually enough to do the checking task.
I have already implemented it in this project. It's based on nodejs package named grunt-deadlink, Travis-CI configuration is also included. Unfortunately it doesn't support nightly test (as far as I know).
For shiny badge you can simply use this badge generator service.
Another tool that could also be integrated in your CI-Pipeline is mlc.
I integrated it in the pipeline of another project of mine
The mlc link checker is written in rust and fairly fast by using async calls to check web links.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Do you know any good tools to support the translation of .arb files?
It's a standard for Flutter and since Google Translator Toolkit will be sunset soon (https://support.google.com/translatortoolkit/answer/9462068) we're searching for a good solution to translate/gather our translations
Edit (June 2020): There's great new open source project called Arbify. This is a self-hosted tool to manage multiple translation projects focused on Flutter. You can edit arb files and fetch them via Dart package tool.
Aside from that some services like POEditor have announced basic support for ARB too.
At the moment the best support for arb files is on Localizely. However, this is a paid service and has strict limits on a free version. It allows to export arb translation files with plurals and placeholder support. It doesn't support genders, though.
There is also one simple web editor and one desktop editor (Babel) that support arb files.
Crowdin supports .arb:
https://support.crowdin.com/supported-formats/
It is also able to pull the data from a Git repo and send Pull Requests on GitHub.
However, when I used it in 2018 there was a problem of ##last_modified attribute being updated without any other changes to the translation files, causing lots of churn in PRs. By that time, they were reluctant to improve the situation (based on email conversation with their support), so we resorted to manual edits.
https://localise.biz/ allows 2000 translations. Which I assume are 1000 strings in 2 languages or ~666 strings in 3 languages and so on. Which is more than https://localizely.com/ 150 strings
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm writing documentation for a GitHub project and wondering where should I write it to. There seems to be three options: GitHub Pages, GitHub Wiki or a set of Markdown files in the repository (e.g. under docs/ directory) similar to the README.md. Understandably I don't want to write the same documentation to multiple places so I have to pick one.
So what are the differences, pros and cons between the options? Any experience or thoughts about using them especially for project documentation? Also is there other options in addition to the three?
that is a very good question which I personally decide on a change-frequency and number-of-contributors basis.
As an example: in one of our projects (a c++ library) we create a HTML documentation with doxygen once in a while (e.g. while updating the master release branch). That's a perfect match for quasi-static gh-pages. In addition you get a sub domain for it http://<user>.github.io/<project>/ and you can register your own domains on top of it.
An other project contains developer and user documentation (a C++ program). I personally prefer to provide a main workflow for developers in .md files to keep them consistent with the mainline development. Changes will be reviewed by pull requests first.
But for user documentation we choose the build-in wiki since it is very easy to edit and modify - one can even allow modifications by non-members of a team.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have searched around and can't find anything, so could anyone help me with getting notepad++ to work seamlessly with Github. I would like to be able to open notepad++ and be able to work on files, then when I save (or live) it will show on Github. I have installed everything they say I need to and have the README, but that's all.
Have you tried this plugin for Notepad++?
http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1358320/all
You can not save directly on github but you can save and then commit these modified files.
This is really an old question, but I just bumped into it today and thought I'd share my strategy, as the plugin proposed here requires also TortoiseSVN, which is a setup that I don't find as fluid and easy to use as my alternative.
After finding that there's no "stand-alone" plugin you can get for this, I started using GitHub Desktop App. This enables you to set repositories locally, make commits, pulls, pushes, etc. Just login with your account, and then create a local repository for your project.
After creating the repository, just open the files you wish to edit with Notepad++. Make some changes, save and use the GitHub Desktop Application to do all GitHub related stuff. Opposed to the plugin, this app provides a full featured interaction with GitHub.
By the way, if you have two monitors, or a big one, you can just have the two applications open side by side, which emulates similar setups you can find in advanced IDEs (Eclipse, for example). I find this to be even more convenient and fluid than having to open a separate plugin dialogue for doing my Git related stuff. The GitHub Desktop application will even refresh automatically, without any interaction being required from you, after you make any editions to the files (using Notepadd++) or any changes in the file structure (add, rename, move, delete files).
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I need a simple, web-based version control tool. 'Version Control' probably implies a lot of functionality I don't need such as diff and merge.
Basically, I have a lot of non-programmer types working on binary files (think Photoshop PSDs), and I would just like a way to check them out and in, and keep previous versions.
Web-based would be ideal, I just want something better than nested folders on a shared drive.
Suggestions?
You could try asvcs: it's web-based and very simple. My advice would be to try one of the known solutions (svn, git, mercurial, even bazaar) and use only the features you need.
Dropbox provides a web interface and can be used as a simple version control system.
Try building something around git. (Or maybe set up a private github account.)
Springloops has what you're looking for. However, it's a paid service. Integrates nicely with Basecamp
You could also use Dropbox. There's version control of sorts. But history is kept only for 1 month.
And there's github
I know through experience that Atlassian's Confluence wiki solution will do versioning for binary uploads. I'm sure there are probably other open source alternatives available as well.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
There are many free online Source Control available but I would like to know your experience on it, if any, and which is the best one?
Me and my friend are starting a small test project and would like some really good online source control.
We will be developing ASP.Net app.
If you're just after a hosted source code repository:
Github
Bitbucket
If you need issue tracking, file releases, wikis, mailing lists, etc:
Sourceforge
Google Code Hosting
I've got one project at Sourceforge, and I find the amenities quite nice. You might find this comparison handy.
I'm using Unfuddle for some personal stuff to avoid issues with corporate firewalls.
You can commit over http with them.
Otherwise, use Github as already suggested.