Skip to content

Major Upgrade - Latest Nuxt Packages #344

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

Open
wants to merge 68 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bryantgillespie
Copy link
Member

@bryantgillespie bryantgillespie commented May 14, 2025

Lots of changes in this one. Biggest one is upgrading Nuxt packages significantly improves dev performance.

Notable Changes

  • Upgrade to Nuxt packages - UI v3, Content v3, latest releases of Nuxt core
  • Added quick links in left sidebar for important sections
  • Make search bar more noticeable

Add support for copy raw page to markdown (for LLMs)

ScreenShot 2025-05-14 at 11 19 35@2x


Newsletter Callout at bottom of page

ScreenShot 2025-05-14 at 11 18 21@2x


Tweaks to API Reference

ScreenShot 2025-05-14 at 11 11 47@2x

  • Method navigation now working
  • Method name is sticky
  • Show Responses in tabs
  • Sync code group tabs across the site so that if you select SDK or GraphQL that maintains the state across all the tabs across different pages

Still Left To Do

  • Sort tutorial navigation in the left side on /tutorials routes (shows all tutorials, should only show tutorial sections and tags (technologies)
  • API reference -> code sample overflow
  • Mobile navigation menu
  • Add section name to left sidebar navigation
  • License section on the docs

Copy link

vercel bot commented May 14, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
docs ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Jun 16, 2025 9:34pm

@bryantgillespie bryantgillespie marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2025 21:24
@bryantgillespie bryantgillespie requested a review from a team as a code owner June 11, 2025 21:24
Copy link
Member

@connorwinston connorwinston left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks mostly good to me! Almost all of my comments are just type error/linting stuff. Besides the APi navigation comment. Wonder if we should add typechecking, linting, and formatting to the docs and setup GitHub workflows to validate it and run tests?


async function copyPage() {
try {
const value = (props.page?.rawbody ?? '').replace(/\\n/g, '\n');
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

When copying the markdown of a page, it does not resolve partials...wondering if it should? For instance, copying start has this line in it :partial{content="license"} instead of the license partial!

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah that's correct - it was a tradeoff.

Should be improved but even the Nuxt team doesn't seem to have a great way to handle this yet.

One idea was to just convert the final rendered HTML back into markdown. But again didn't want scope to keep creeping on this one.

Copy link
Member

@connorwinston connorwinston left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks mostly good to me! Almost all of my comments are just type error/linting stuff. Besides the APi navigation comment. Wonder if we should add typechecking, linting, and formatting to the docs and setup GitHub workflows to validate it and run tests?

Co-authored-by: Connor Winston <[email protected]>
@bryantgillespie
Copy link
Member Author

Looks mostly good to me! Almost all of my comments are just type error/linting stuff. Besides the APi navigation comment. Wonder if we should add typechecking, linting, and formatting to the docs and setup GitHub workflows to validate it and run tests?

We should probably do this yes. But maybe not in this one eh?

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.

3 participants