Skip to content

Docs: restructure into Diataxis-style docs and align examples with current behavior#28

Open
d-lazenby wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/improve-documentation
Open

Docs: restructure into Diataxis-style docs and align examples with current behavior#28
d-lazenby wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/improve-documentation

Conversation

@d-lazenby

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

This PR overhauls the project documentation to be clearer for end users while keeping it concise and navigable.

Closes #26

What changed

  • Reworked README.md into a true landing page that delegates to focused docs.
  • Added a step-by-step tutorial in TUTORIAL.md.
  • Added/expanded dedicated docs for:
    • CONSUMER_SETUP.md
    • MANIFEST_SCHEMA.md
    • ARCHITECTURE.md
    • PERMISSIONS_TROUBLESHOOTING.md
  • Fixed setup/example issues:
    • corrected manifest download URL in setup docs
    • corrected cron expression example
    • updated default updater reference to v1
    • corrected source_prefix examples to start with git::
  • Reduced duplication between architecture and troubleshooting docs (unmanaged-module warnings now explained once, with cross-reference).
  • Updated troubleshooting log guidance to match actual current runtime output.
  • Standardized selector wording in docs/examples/tests:
    • exactly one of glob, file or files
    • updated in update-modules-manifest.example.yml, models.py, and test_models.py

Why

  • Improve clarity and discoverability for first-time users.
  • Better align docs with Diataxis principles:
    • tutorial for learning
    • how-to for setup
    • reference for schema
    • explanation for architecture
  • Remove misleading or outdated examples.

Scope and impact

  • No functional behavior change intended.
  • Minor wording consistency change in validation/error text and corresponding test expectation.

Validation

  • Updated docs reviewed for consistency and cross-linking.
  • Selector wording change reflected in tests:
    • test_models.py

@d-lazenby d-lazenby requested a review from a team as a code owner June 12, 2026 16:51
Comment thread docs/MANIFEST_SCHEMA.md

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

NIT: Minor formatting inconsistency

Requirement types should follow a consistent format.

At the moment, some are defined as:

`name` (required, string)

Others are defined as:

`glob` (string)

And some include defaults:

`pin` (string, default: `"sha"`)

Consider standardising all definitions to the same structure, e.g.:

`field` (required|optional, type, default: value)

This keeps things consistent across:

  • required/optional
  • type
  • default value (where applicable)

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.

Improve Documentation for Terraform Module Update Workflow

2 participants