Skip to content
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

Development: Update programming exercise docs for integrated code lifecycle #9509

Merged

Conversation

BBesrour
Copy link
Member

@BBesrour BBesrour commented Oct 17, 2024

Checklist

General

Motivation and Context

Added a section about editing the checkout paths

Steps for Testing

Make sure that docs are correct and comprehensible

Testserver States

Note

These badges show the state of the test servers.
Green = Currently available, Red = Currently locked
Click on the badges to get to the test servers.







Review Progress

Code Review

  • Code Review 1
  • Code Review 2

Test Coverage

Screenshots

image

image

Summary by CodeRabbit

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Introduced a validation bar for improved navigation during programming exercise setup.
    • Added sections for editing repository checkout paths, configuring static code analysis, and verifying exercise configurations.
  • Documentation

    • Enhanced clarity and usability of the programming exercise setup guide with additional notes and warnings.
    • Removed specific version constraints for Sphinx-related packages to allow for the latest updates.

@BBesrour BBesrour requested a review from a team as a code owner October 17, 2024 19:25
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 17, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request involve updates to the requirements.txt file and the programming-exercise-setup.inc documentation. The requirements.txt file has had version specifications removed for several Sphinx-related packages, allowing for the use of the latest versions. The documentation file has been significantly revised to improve clarity and usability, including the addition of new sections related to repository checkout paths, static code analysis configuration, and exercise verification.

Changes

File Change Summary
docs/requirements.txt Removed version specifications for Sphinx, sphinx-rtd-theme, sphinx-autobuild, and sphinxcontrib-bibtex.
docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc Added new sections: Edit Repositories Checkout Paths, Edit Maximum Build Duration, Configure Static Code Analysis, and Verify the exercise configuration. Expanded existing content for clarity and usability.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

config-change, small, ready to merge

Suggested reviewers

  • b-fein
  • coolchock
  • edkaya

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai or @coderabbitai title anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 2

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc (2)

397-397: Correct the capitalization of 'OCaml'

The programming language 'OCaml' should be correctly capitalized to maintain consistency.

Apply this diff:

-For example, for Java exercises, only the assignment repository path can be changed. For Ocaml exercises, the assignment, test, and solution repository paths can be changed.
+For example, for Java exercises, only the assignment repository path can be changed. For OCaml exercises, the assignment, test, and solution repository paths can be changed.

399-399: Capitalize 'Docker' appropriately

'Docker' is a proper noun and should be capitalized.

Apply this diff:

-For C programming exercises, if used with the default docker image, changing the checkout paths will lead to build errors. The default docker image is configured to work with the default checkout paths.
+For C programming exercises, if used with the default Docker image, changing the checkout paths will lead to build errors. The default Docker image is configured to work with the default checkout paths.
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 98d6d06 and ee842c1.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
  • docs/user/exercises/programming/checkout-paths-edit.png is excluded by !**/*.png, !**/*.png
  • docs/user/exercises/programming/checkout-paths-preview.png is excluded by !**/*.png, !**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • docs/requirements.txt (1 hunks)
  • docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc (2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • docs/requirements.txt
🧰 Additional context used

@BBesrour BBesrour changed the title `Development: Update programming exercise ICL docs Development: Update programming exercise ICL docs Oct 17, 2024
coderabbitai[bot]
coderabbitai bot previously approved these changes Oct 17, 2024
cremertim
cremertim previously approved these changes Oct 17, 2024
SimonEntholzer
SimonEntholzer previously approved these changes Oct 18, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@SimonEntholzer SimonEntholzer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Lgtm

docs/requirements.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
coderabbitai[bot]
coderabbitai bot previously approved these changes Oct 18, 2024
raffifasaro
raffifasaro previously approved these changes Oct 18, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@raffifasaro raffifasaro left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes LGTM

SimonEntholzer
SimonEntholzer previously approved these changes Oct 18, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@SimonEntholzer SimonEntholzer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

re-approve after addition of timeout docs

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc (5)

376-400: Approve new section with minor correction

The new "Edit Repositories Checkout Paths" section provides valuable information about customizing repository checkout paths during exercise creation. It clearly explains the concept and includes important warnings about potential issues.

However, there's a minor syntax issue with the reStructuredText cross-reference directive on line 379.

Please apply this correction:

-**This option is only available when using** :ref:``integrated code lifecycle``
+**This option is only available when using** :ref:`integrated code lifecycle`

403-414: Approve new section with minor correction

The new "Edit Maximum Build Duration" section provides useful information about adjusting the time limit for build plan execution. It clearly explains the concept and includes a visual aid (slider image) to help users understand the interface.

However, there's a minor syntax issue with the reStructuredText cross-reference directive on line 406, similar to the issue in the previous section.

Please apply this correction:

-**This option is only available when using** :ref:``integrated code lifecycle``
+**This option is only available when using** :ref:`integrated code lifecycle`

Line range hint 416-474: Approve updates with a minor suggestion

The expanded "Configure static code analysis" section provides excellent detailed information about static code analysis tools and their configuration. The new table clearly shows supported tools for different programming languages, which is very helpful for users.

The updates significantly improve the clarity and usefulness of this section.

For consistency, consider adding a brief explanation for the empty cells in the "Configuration File" column of the table, particularly for GCC and PMD Copy/Paste Detector (CPD). This would help users understand if these tools don't require configuration files or if the information is missing.


Line range hint 476-684: Approve updates with a minor suggestion for clarity

The expanded "Configure Grading" section provides comprehensive and detailed information about configuring grading for programming exercises. The new subsections for the Test Case Tab and Code Analysis Tab are particularly helpful in explaining the different aspects of grading configuration.

The explanations of grading options and their effects are clear and well-illustrated with examples. The inclusion of a video tutorial is also a great addition for visual learners.

To further improve clarity, consider adding a brief introductory paragraph at the beginning of the "Configure Grading" section that outlines the two main aspects of grading configuration (Test Cases and Code Analysis) before diving into the details. This would help users understand the overall structure of the grading configuration process.


Line range hint 686-726: Approve updates with a minor suggestion for consistency

The updated "Verify the exercise configuration" section provides valuable information about verifying the exercise setup, including the new feature for comparing template and solution repositories. This addition is particularly useful for instructors to review the changes students are expected to make.

The explanation of the comparison feature and the included images are helpful in guiding users through the process.

For consistency with the rest of the document, consider adding a brief explanation of why comparing the template and solution repositories is important in the exercise verification process. This would help tie this new feature more closely to the overall goal of ensuring the exercise is correctly configured.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between a9cb464 and c0c4014.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
  • docs/user/exercises/programming/timeout-slider.png is excluded by !**/*.png, !**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc (3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc (1)

Line range hint 1-726: Excellent updates to the programming exercise setup documentation

The changes made to this documentation file significantly improve its clarity, comprehensiveness, and usefulness. The new sections on editing repository checkout paths and maximum build duration, along with the expanded sections on static code analysis and grading configuration, provide valuable guidance for instructors setting up programming exercises.

The addition of visual aids, such as images and a video tutorial, enhances the user experience and makes the instructions easier to follow.

To ensure overall consistency and completeness, please run the following script to check for any remaining :ref: directives that might need updating:

If this script returns any results, please update those :ref: directives to use single backticks instead of double backticks.

✅ Verification successful

Action Required: Further Verification Needed

To ensure there are no incorrectly formatted :ref: directives remaining, please run the following script:


All :ref: Directives Are Correctly Formatted

The verification process confirmed that there are no incorrectly formatted :ref: directives using improper backticks in the programming-exercise-setup.inc documentation. The documentation adheres to the correct syntax and formatting standards.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for potentially incorrect :ref: directives in the file

rg --type rst ':ref:``' docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc

Length of output: 76


Script:

# Generated Script for Enhanced Verification
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for incorrect :ref: directives with improper backticks

rg --type rst ':ref:`[^`]+``' docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-setup.inc

Length of output: 82

Copy link
Contributor

@raffifasaro raffifasaro left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

re-approval

Copy link

@HawKhiem HawKhiem left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@krusche krusche added this to the 7.6.1 milestone Oct 19, 2024
@krusche krusche merged commit 75eb4b6 into develop Oct 19, 2024
11 checks passed
@krusche krusche deleted the chore/development/update-programming-exercise-icl-docs branch October 19, 2024 09:42
@krusche krusche changed the title Development: Update programming exercise ICL docs Development: Update programming exercise docs for integrated code lifecycle Oct 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants