-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.9k
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
Update the "Resources" section in the docs #15076
Conversation
This pull request was closed due to a lack of activity for 7 days after it was stale. |
a1d0cd0
to
3422401
Compare
There was an error when running
Please check that your changes are working as intended. |
37818e0
to
81d0ed4
Compare
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity. |
Relevant |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The changes look good to me now, we just need to squash the commits. I was also wondering if we could merge the changes proposed in this PR: #15339, or possibly even close it. I haven’t looked too closely at the tools being proposed - although the static analyzer seems nice - but since we're working on the same docs and there’s some overlap in the changes, this might be a good time to make a decision on that.
* `Solidity website <https://soliditylang.org/>`_ | ||
* `Solidity changelog <https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/blob/develop/Changelog.md>`_ | ||
* `Solidity codebase on GitHub <https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/>`_ | ||
* `Solidity language users chat <https://matrix.to/#/#ethereum_solidity:gitter.im>`_ | ||
* `Solidity compiler developers chat <https://matrix.to/#/#ethereum_solidity-dev:gitter.im>`_ | ||
* `awesome-solidity <https://github.com/bkrem/awesome-solidity>`_ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This still not in alphabetical order, but I guess the idea was to keep it as it was before, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's correct. Just made minor naming changes in the title that I thought were more appropriate. But otherwise, I'm not strongly set on the order.
@r0qs Thanks for the review. I wanted to get to this today. Just caught up in some other issues. The idea is to consolidate the changes proposed in the external contribution, so I will ask for a final review once I've included those. :) |
No problem. But yeah, that was just a suggestion though, because we have so many documentation PRs that have small changes, that maybe we could combine some of them. For example, this may also be relevant to add here or just close it: #15234 |
There was an error when running
Please check that your changes are working as intended. |
* `Solidity website <https://soliditylang.org/>`_ | ||
* `Solidity changelog <https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/blob/develop/Changelog.md>`_ | ||
* `Solidity codebase on GitHub <https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/>`_ | ||
* `Solidity language users chat <https://matrix.to/#/#ethereum_solidity:gitter.im>`_ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why did you move this to lower caps? The previous style is more consistent with the rest of our docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it just looked a little weird, IMO, in that earlier format. But I don't think it's too big of a deal. LMK if you think I should change it back or if it's okay as is now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Note that CI is failing (it's the spellcheck job - you have a spelling mistake somewhere in there).
Other than that it looks good. I haven't reviewed this in detail, but it's been sitting there for a long time and it would be nice to finally get this merged.
BTW, you could list all the other redundant PRs in your description and github will automatically close them when we merge this one. That would make it easier to keep track of them, because we have quite a few now. To do this write something like |
Co-authored-by: Nikola Matić <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Nikola Matić <[email protected]>
f6290b4
to
3bba192
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me, but needs some commit squashing. I guess we could just squash-merge?
Closes #15339
Closes #15234
Closes #15575