At Tidepool, we are using GitBook for documentation across our client-side apps and here in this repository for "no man's land" docs without a proper home in another repo. GitBook is a tool for generating a static documentation website (with built-in search) from a set of Markdown files (which are handily thus natively renderable by the GitHub online interface). We use GitHub Pages to publish the GitBook-generated static assets on the web at various paths under the base URL of our developer microsite at If you need to add or update the docs in this repo or in another repo that employs GitBook for publishing documentation, follow the instructions below.

Jump to...

Setting up your repo to work on docs

When we at Tidepool first set up our docs workflow using GitBook, there was only one way to set up GitHub Pages for a project: putting the static assets (HTML, CSS, etc.) you wanted GitHub to serve as your GitHub Pages site on a branch in your repository named gh-pages. This method of building a GitHub Pages site still exists, and it's what we still use at Tidepoola. Every time we update the static assets on the gh-pages branch and push to the GitHub remote repository, our project page is updated to serve the new static files.

The workflow for managing one's static assets when the method of publishing is the gh-pages branch is a little unintuitive since the code on the gh-pages branch (a bunch of HTML & CSS files) has very little relation (in most cases) to the code on the master and other branches in the repository. We follow the workflow originally recommended by GitHub, which involves creating an embedded separate clone of the repository with only the gh-pages branch. Using a separate clone to manage the gh-pages branch makes everything easier and less confusing/dangerous when there is zero code shared between the gh-pages branch and master (or other branches). When you embed the separate clone inside your working repository—in our case, always with the directory name web (see step (1) in the setup instructions below)—this allows scripting tools to target the embedded clone/directory where the gh-pages branch is always checked out. In our case, every repository using GitBook contains the GitBook source Markdown files on master (often in a docs/ directory but also in other locations as necessary). Then the build script included in each repository runs the GitBook build tool to generate the static HTML, CSS, and JavaScript files in the embedded repository clone so that the build result ends up on the gh-pages branch where it needs to be to "publish" the site updates by pushing the branch up to the GitHub remote.

To set up this workflow for yourself, follow these steps:

  1. Clone another copy of this repository, nested inside your top-level docs directory, but give it the name 'web': git clone web. (The optional final argument to git clone tells git to name the cloned directory something other than the default repo name.)
  2. Navigate into the new clone with cd web/.
  3. Checkout the gh-pages branch in the new clone with git checkout gh-pages.
  4. Delete the master branch in the new clone since you will only be using this clone for managing the GitHub Pages code for the repo: git branch -d master.
  5. Test that you can view the GitHub Pages site locally by serving up the site to yourself (e.g., with the Python one-liner python -m SimpleHTTPServer) and viewing it in a browser.

(Example given for this repository docs, but the same procedure is recommended for all Tidepool repos using GitBook, just substitute the repo name (e.g., chrome-uploader) for docs in the above instructions.)

When you want to make changes to docs, you will branch from master and edit the source Markdown file(s), then open a pull request against master as usual. After the pull request is merged, simply run the script and follow the instructions at the conclusion of the script to navigate into web/ and check that the build was successful (e.g., step (5) above), that no non-HTML, CSS, or GitBook-related JavaScript files were incorrectly copied into the embedded cloneb, and then commit the changes and push gh-pages to the GitHub remote to "publish" the changes to the site.

Adding or updating docs

The GitBook documentation is a good, well-organized resource, but the basics are very simple and summarized here.

GitBook is a tool for compiling documentation from Markdown files. At Tidepool, thus far our only target for compilation is a static website that can be hosted on GitHub Pages, but GitBook offers other compilation targets, including PDF and e-reader formats.

At the top level, GitBook requires at minimum a, which serves as the landing site for the documentation. (This you are reading right now is thus the main page content for A is also required; the is where the docs are organized hierarchically, and one very nice thing about GitBook is that the hierarchy as described in the does not have to match the directory structure of the repository! If a Markdown file is not linked in the, it will not be compiled by GitBook (and may appear in your browser as plain Markdown), even if it is linked from another file that is linked in the This issue of a missing link to a new file from the often surfaces with the error message "[some page] contains an hyperlink to resource outside spine [unlinked Markdown file]" during compilation. Basically, if you see that error, check the to make sure it includes everything it should.

Within each sub-directory of docs in your repository, it is conventional to include a as the intro and table of contents for that sub-section of the documentation. In general, a typical GitBook structure (when one is matching directory structure to the, although this is not required) looks like the following:

# Summary

- [sandwich](sandwich/
   + [bacon](sandwich/
   + [lettuce](sandwich/
   + [tomato](sandwich/

Every repository (including this one) that uses GitBook will include scripts for serving the docs to yourself locally (in order to work on them) and to compile the docs, copying the result into the embedded clone of the repository used to manage the gh-pages branch (see Setting up your repo to work on docs above).

To serve the docs to yourself locally at http://localhost:4000/:

$ npm run serve-docs

(In this repository and the data model docs repository, the primary purpose of both of which is documentation, you can also serve the docs with npm start.)

To compile the docs to a static website and copy the result to the embedded clone of the repository in web/:

$ npm run build-docs

Publishing docs

After building the docs with npm run build-docs, publishing the docs via GitHub Pages requires only a few additional steps:

  1. First, navigate to the embedded clone of the repo used for managing the gh-pages branch with cd web/.
  2. (If desired, preview the static site by serving it to yourself with a simple static server (e.g., the Python one-liner python -m SimpleHTTPServer).)
  3. Check the changes with git diff or however you prefer to view changes. One thing to look out for here is irrelevant files that got synced - you may need to clear the changes inside web/, adjust the list of ignored files and directories in the .bookignore file, and rebuild the static site if files unnecessary for the static site (which should be just HTML files, outside of the CSS, JavaScript, and fonts provided under gitbook/) have been copied into web/.
  4. Stage and commit the changes if you're happy with them.
  5. Publish to GitHub Pages by pushing your new commit(s) to the upstream gh-pages branch: git push origin gh-pages.
a. GitHub has since added a couple of far simpler methods, which are simply (a) including an index.html at the root level of your repository on master and choosing the appropriate repo setting to use that as the index for your GitHub Pages site or (b) including all static assets for your GitHub Pages site in a docs/ directory on master (again choosing the appropriate repo setting to tell GitHub to serve the files in this directory as your static site). Eventually perhaps it will make sense for us to upgrade to the simpler docs/ directory workflow, but at the moment with everything set up in the gh-pages branch workflow, investing the time to make the switch is not a high enough priority. (The gh-pages branch workflow also has the advantage of being somewhat cleaner when creating docs with GitBook since only the raw, source Markdown files are tracked on master, removing the potential for a mismatch between the source and compiled static assets, if both were tracked on master.)
b. If you do find non-GitBook HTML, CSS, and JavaScript files in the changes in the embedded clone, you may need to update the .bookignore file.

results matching ""

    No results matching ""