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

Update database documentation #416

Open
lukasschlueter opened this issue Dec 13, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

Update database documentation #416

lukasschlueter opened this issue Dec 13, 2018 · 1 comment

Comments

@lukasschlueter
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, the docs for generating and destroying db models (https://gobuffalo.io/en/docs/db/models/) include the following paragraph:

You can remove generated model by running:
$ soda destroy model [name]
Or in short form:
$ soda d m [name]

This is not correct, as soda does not offer this functionality (while buffalo-pop does).

The simple fix to this is replacing soda with buffalo pop or buffalo db.

But is it really a good thing to use soda in all the examples and have the explanation to use buffalo pop instead written above every example?
I assume it's been this way to provide documentation on pop/soda for people using pop without buffalo, but is this the best place for that? https://gobuffalo.io is the buffalo documentation after all.

Maybe we could use buffalo pop in the examples and extend The Unofficial pop Book or even work on some official documentation/book for pop?

In case we decide for a larger change, changing the destroy documentation might still be a good think for a short term solution.

What do you think?

// cc @gobuffalo/pop-managers @gobuffalo/docs-managers

@stanislas-m
Copy link
Member

stanislas-m commented Feb 19, 2019

Maybe we could use buffalo pop in the examples and extend The Unofficial pop Book or even work on some official documentation/book for pop?

We can't extend The Unofficial pop Book, it's a private project from a person outside the Buffalo org. The original plan was to provide the pop docs in a separate section, then have a section in the buffalo docs for things related only to buffalo's case.

This is not correct, as soda does not offer this functionality (while buffalo-pop does).

Maybe the problem here is just "we should have this feature in soda"? :)

Keep in mind the docs are really a pain to maintain, and the more separate docs we have, the more we have to maintain. Also the idea was to be able to translate the docs, which is not the case with The Unofficial pop Book.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants