Hi Maciek,
The old docs are all still online. Since there aren't links, you just need
to know the URL scheme:
http://rdkit.org/RDKit_Docs.2017_09_1.tgz
http://rdkit.org/RDKit_Docs.2016_03_1.tgz
note that there are almost always only the "_1.tgz" version available; the
patch releases don't normally affect the documentaiton.
-greg
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 3:00 PM Maciek Wójcikowski <mac...@wojcikowski.pl>
wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Speaking about the new docs - would it be possible to have documentation
> for few stable releases back, like 2017.09, 2017.03, etc. Recently I was
> trying to establish the changes in RDKit's API and ended up using git
> blame, whereas I could be able to get that info from changing the release
> on the docs.
>
> ----
> Pozdrawiam, | Best regards,
> Maciek Wójcikowski
> mac...@wojcikowski.pl
>
> 2018-05-02 11:17 GMT+02:00 David Cosgrove <davidacosgrov...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi Greg,
>> After a quick poke about, I think the new documentation looks great in
>> general. If a change is forced on you, then I suggest you just do it in a
>> way that makes your life as easy as possible. If people don't like it,
>> they can always put the effort in to do something different and then I
>> expect they'll quickly come round to realising that your way is perfectly
>> fine. One way of fixing the docstring formatting would be to put
>> instructions and a couple of examples somewhere handy and ask people to fix
>> problems when they encounter them as they read the docs. That should be a
>> small effort from each person that would hopefully fix the important ones
>> quickly in a self-prioritising manner.
>> Thanks for putting the time into this,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Greg Landrum <greg.land...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Just over a year ago I asked for feedback on a new documentation format
>>> for the RDKit python API:
>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/rdkit-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net/msg06688.html
>>> Some useful feedback came in on that thread (thanks to those who replied
>>> there and in private email), but I ran out of time/motivation to spend time
>>> on this.
>>>
>>> With my motivation recharged thanks to the "fun" of using epydoc to
>>> document the last release, I revisited the topic this weekend and actually
>>> made some progress.[1] I'd like to gather a second round of feedback on
>>> that.
>>>
>>> The documentation is here:
>>> http://rdkit.org/docs_temp/index.html
>>> The API docs (which are where the biggest changes are) are here:
>>> http://rdkit.org/docs_temp/api-docs.html
>>>
>>> To address some of the things raised last time:
>>> - This really isn't optional. It's been more than a decade since epydoc
>>> was updated and it requires python 2.7.
>>> - My previous attempt to auto-generate docs used pdoc (
>>> https://github.com/BurntSushi/pdoc). That project also seems to have
>>> died, so it's not really an option.
>>> - Based upon the two factors above I decided to use the autodoc
>>> functionality that's part of Sphinx. It's not perfect, but it's supported
>>> (and seems likely to continue to be so since it's part of Sphinx)
>>>
>>> - The docs now have a search box
>>>
>>> - We've lost the overview (list of classes/functions/etc) that epydoc
>>> provides. There likely is a way to do this with sphinx, but I haven't
>>> managed to get it to work yet
>>>
>>> - Formatting: Some of the docstrings end up looking pretty good, others
>>> are awful. Here's a module that demonstrates both sides of the coin:
>>> http://rdkit.org/docs_temp/source/rdkit.Chem.AtomPairs.Pairs.html#module-rdkit.Chem.AtomPairs.Pairs
>>> Fixing this is "just" a matter of editing the doc strings. This is
>>> reasonably mechanical, but unfortunately not automatable, work. It should
>>> be done, but in the meantime the broken docstrings aren't completely
>>> useless.
>>>
>>> There's also a github issue for this:
>>> https://github.com/rdkit/rdkit/issues/1656
>>> I'm doing the work on this branch:
>>> https://github.com/greglandrum/rdkit/tree/dev/usinx_sphinx_autodoc
>>>
>>> -greg
>>> [1] Remember how I said I was going to take a short break and do
>>> something fun? This isn't that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rdkit-discuss mailing list
>>> Rdkit-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rdkit-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Cosgrove
>> Freelance computational chemistry and chemoinformatics developer
>> http://cozchemix.co.uk
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rdkit-discuss mailing list
>> Rdkit-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rdkit-discuss
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Rdkit-discuss mailing list
Rdkit-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rdkit-discuss
