doc: add seealso link to src-layout vs flat-layout discussion#14184
doc: add seealso link to src-layout vs flat-layout discussion#14184webknjaz merged 2 commits intopytest-dev:mainfrom
Conversation
Add a ``.. seealso::`` cross-reference to the packaging.python.org discussion on src layout vs flat layout, using intersphinx rather than a raw URL.
webknjaz
added
type: docs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds an intersphinx-based cross-reference in the pytest “Good Integration Practices” docs to the Python Packaging User Guide’s discussion of the src vs flat layout trade-offs.
Changes:
- Add a
.. seealso::block linking topackaging:discussions/src-layout-vs-flat-layoutusing the existingpackagingintersphinx mapping.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
doc/en/explanation/goodpractices.rst
Outdated
| .. seealso:: | ||
|
|
||
| :doc:`packaging:discussions/src-layout-vs-flat-layout` | ||
| The Python Packaging User Guide discusses the trade-offs between the ``src`` layout and flat layout. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For consistency with the prior src literal markup, consider also marking “flat” as a literal (flat layout) in the description text.
| The Python Packaging User Guide discusses the trade-offs between the ``src`` layout and flat layout. | |
| The Python Packaging User Guide discusses the trade-offs between the ``src`` layout and ``flat`` layout. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure this should be highlighted like that, honestly.
webknjaz
left a comment
webknjaz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright, if Bruno is fine with this wording, I have nothing against..
Backport to 9.0.x: 💚 backport PR created✅ Backport PR branch: Backported as #14188 🤖 @patchback |
doc: add seealso link to src-layout vs flat-layout discussion (cherry picked from commit 3c37b55)
…c37b551e71c8b18c5323dac8a27d248bb98a5a9/pr-14184 [PR #14184/3c37b551 backport][9.0.x] doc: add seealso link to src-layout vs flat-layout discussion
3 participants
Split from #14181 per @webknjaz's review — keeping changes atomic.
Changes
Add a
.. seealso::cross-reference ingoodpractices.rstto the packaging.python.org discussion on src layout vs flat layout.Reworked from the original PR to use intersphinx (via the existing
packagingmapping) instead of a raw URL, per @webknjaz's feedback.Open question from the previous review: whether a standalone
.. seealso::block is the right approach, or whether linking the existing text inline would be better. Happy to rework if there's a preference.