Skip to content

docs: the published package list pointed users at archived repositories - #33

Open
belkassaby wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/available-packages-monorepo-consolidation
Open

belkassaby wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/available-packages-monorepo-consolidation

Conversation

@belkassaby

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

The problem

docs/reference/available-packages.md is published on the docs site (mkdocs nav, "Reference → Available Packages") and told readers:

Each package has its own documentation and code repository, which can be found in the links above.

That is no longer true. Checked each repo with gh:

Repo Archived Last push
geneweaver-core no 2025-04-30
geneweaver-db yes 2026-03-20
geneweaver-client yes 2024-12-11
geneweaver-tools yes 2025-01-15
geneweaver-testing yes 2024-03-18
geneweaver-boolean-algebra yes 2025-01-15

Core, db, client and tools are developed here under packages/; five of the six standalone repos are archived.

Why geneweaver-tools is the sharpest case

The page describes it as "a framework for creating analysis tools" and links to PyPI. The archived repo at 0.0.5 contains only src/geneweaver/tools/framework/ — abstract.py, enum.py, schema.py — and no tool implementations at all.

The nine ported analysis tools (BooleanAlgebra, Combine, DBSCAN, HyperGeometric, JaccardClustering, JaccardSimilarity, MSET, PhenomeMap, UpSet) live in this monorepo at packages/tools (0.20.0a0) and are unpublished. A reader following that link expecting to run GeneWeaver's analysis tools finds none of them.

The change

One admonition after the package list. Deliberately conservative:

  • PyPI links stay. They are still valid install targets, and pip install geneweaver-client is the recommended path for researchers further down the same page.
  • Names which repos are archived, rather than implying all are — geneweaver-core's is not.
  • Calls out the tools gap explicitly, since that is the one that would actually mislead someone into a dead end.
  • Replaces the "each package has its own … code repository" sentence.

Left alone: the two mermaid diagrams. The relationship graph is arguably stale too (it shows geneweaver-boolean-algebra feeding the application, whereas it is now a plugin dependency of the AsyncTask service), but redrawing it is an editorial call rather than a factual fix, and I did not want to bundle it.

Verification

mkdocs build --strict exits 0 with zero warnings.

Related

Separate from #32 (AsyncTask plugin registration), which touches docs/tools/TOOLS_MIGRATION.md but not this page. Two findings worth flagging that are not addressed here:

  1. geneweaver-testing is archived, yet it is still a live dev dependency of this repo ([dependency-groups] dev = ["geneweaver-testing>=0.1.2"], resolved from PyPI, not the workspace).
  2. geneweaver-boolean-algebra is archived, yet the AsyncTask service still depends on 0.3.0a23. That is useful input to the open question of whether it or packages/tools' BooleanAlgebra is authoritative.

`docs/reference/available-packages.md` is on the public docs site and advertised
every GeneWeaver package as having "its own documentation and code repository".
That is no longer true: core, db, client and tools are developed in this
monorepo under `packages/`, and the standalone repositories for db, client,
tools, testing and boolean-algebra are archived on GitHub.

Most misleading was `geneweaver-tools`. The published package contains the
`AbstractTool` framework only -- the archived repo has nothing under
`src/geneweaver/tools/` except `framework/` -- while the nine ported analysis
tools live here in `packages/tools` and are unpublished. A reader following that
link to run GeneWeaver tools would find no tools.

Keeps the PyPI links, which are still valid install targets, and names which
repositories are archived rather than implying all of them are
(`geneweaver-core`'s is not).

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant