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

feat: extension point for myst options #115

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tavin
Copy link
Contributor

@tavin tavin commented Mar 20, 2023

No description provided.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Binder 👈 Launch a Binder on branch tavin/jupyterlab-myst/feat/myst-options

Copy link
Member

@rowanc1 rowanc1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Took a look through the PR, haven't tested it out locally yet though!

@agoose77 I would be curious on your thoughts on the extension mechanism, I am not that familiar in that area at all!

Comment on lines +47 to +48
if (this._doRendering) this.renderInput(null as unknown as Widget);
this._doRendering = true;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this because downstream you are calling this constructor?

Do we need this render in here at all? Or can we remove it + the option and explicitly call renderInput when we need to?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@tavin tavin Mar 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's all just a horrible hack because of a bug in the 3.5.x parent class. A cursory look tells me it's fixed in the 3.6.x series. I don't know when it's okay for jupyterlab-myst to start following v3.6. But once the bug is gone, this code can be gone.

src/myst.ts Outdated
Comment on lines 39 to 42
export interface MySTOptions {

parserOptions: Partial<AllOptions>;
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@fwkoch is there any thinking we need to on this before we start encouraging using these more widely?!

They look pretty solid I think.

src/myst.ts Outdated
Comment on lines 49 to 59
export class MySTNotebookDefaults implements MySTOptionsProvider<StaticNotebook> {

get(notebook: StaticNotebook): MySTOptions {
return {
parserOptions: {
directives: [cardDirective, gridDirective, ...tabDirectives],
roles: [evalRole],
},
};
}
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would love to see you are overriding things with other extensions @tavin!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

src/myst.ts Outdated
directives: [cardDirective, gridDirective, ...tabDirectives],
roles: [evalRole]
});
export function markdownParse(text: string, options: Partial<AllOptions>): Root {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should options be potentially undefined here (and other places)?

Suggested change
export function markdownParse(text: string, options: Partial<AllOptions>): Root {
export function markdownParse(text: string, options?: Partial<AllOptions>): Root {

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am newish to typescript, actually I didn't know that was available syntax.... but anyway, I don't know? Why?

@tavin
Copy link
Contributor Author

tavin commented Mar 26, 2023

@rowanc1 I got all the checks passing except "PR label" which it seems I'm not allowed to edit.

@tavin tavin marked this pull request as ready for review March 26, 2023 17:21
@rowanc1 rowanc1 added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 27, 2023
@tavin
Copy link
Contributor Author

tavin commented Apr 19, 2023

@rowanc1 Does this need a deeper discussion with stakeholders to move it along? I am not sure where or with whom to pursue that... but I think I can explain why these changes make sense :)

@agoose77 agoose77 changed the title extension point for myst options feat: extension point for myst options Apr 26, 2023
@agoose77
Copy link
Collaborator

At a high level, this looks reasonable, thanks @tavin! Some points I'm not clear on:

  • why does the interface accept a notebook widget? Is that a use case you already have a need for?
  • @rowanc1 what's the benefit from defining directives without defining the renderer? Is it just to map new directives onto existing mdast so that they can be rendered?

@tavin
Copy link
Contributor Author

tavin commented Apr 27, 2023

@agoose77

  • why does the interface accept a notebook widget? Is that a use case you already have a need for?

I can imagine several ways of choosing myst options:

  • through a jupyterlab settings page, handled by a standard labextension (maybe part of jupyterlab-myst, or in any case maintained by executablebooks?) ... this being the use case that doesn't need the notebook reference
  • notebook metadata (why not, if someone wants to write a labextension for it?)
  • reading a _config.yml file reachable from the notebook file (another labextension possibility which I might attempt)

When the markdown preview integration is ready I am thinking my approach would be duplicated with some kind of document object in place of the notebook object. Then for me the 3rd bullet point would be great for working with jupyter books "live" i.e. without constantly rebuilding and reloading the output.

To be fair I'm not 100% sure how to use the notebook (document) object for these purposes but I read over some code and API docs and it seemed to me that it should be possible.

A simpler argument is that it's probably wrong to assume that globally fixed myst options are correct for every project/file a user edits. The notebook (document) object is the obvious thing to switch on.

@agoose77
Copy link
Collaborator

agoose77 commented May 12, 2023

OK, I circled back around to look at this!

I'm a bit hesitant in merging this because I have not yet thought about what the extension picture should look like. In part, that's because the question of extensibility goes beyond just making jupyterlab-myst work, and into defining these extensions alongside the document.

Furthermore, there are questions as to whether extensions should be per-document, or per-environment (I think the former).

Maybe we can start by having discussions with @stevejpurves @rowanc1 et al. to figure out how we want to capture this information.

I can see a fairly straightforward solution, which involves defining a frontmatter entry that contains a table of reserved extension names. Then, the frontend can be in charge of ensuring that those extensions are loaded (i.e. some kind of plugin system). There's also a question of versioning, but this extends beyond plugins to the MyST distribution itself.

What happens for third-party extensions is less clear; I am worried about the fragmentation that comes from this, but it's also important to help people use MyST as they need it.

@tavin
Copy link
Contributor Author

tavin commented May 12, 2023

I think this particular PR should be viewed as merely adding a technical path forward so that someone could build a jupyterlab settings page where people can opt into colon fences or whatever.

For me and @meldefon well we just wanna be able to edit documents with sphinx proof directives and see something that looks like an admonition in the markdown preview. If this PR is merged I can very easily hack that into my local environment with a labextension -- that I can share -- while we wait for sphinx proof to land in mystjs.

Also I've hinted at wanting to be able to detect what myst options are set in my jupyter book build and mimic those. Why not?

I am not trying to create a myst-markdown extension/plugin architecture right now :)

@agoose77
Copy link
Collaborator

For me and @meldefon well we just wanna be able to edit documents with sphinx proof directives and see something that looks like an admonition in the markdown preview. If this PR is merged I can very easily hack that into my local environment with a labextension -- that I can share -- while we wait for sphinx proof to land in mystjs.

OK, this is a good argument. Right now, it's really helpful that you're testing these things out. Long term, I don't think this PR is the right way forward, but I don't want to hold things back in the near term. So, I propose that we merge it as an experimental interface that may be removed in future. Does this work for you? You can always pin to the version of jupyterlab-myst that contains this code to ensure it always works for you.

@tavin
Copy link
Contributor Author

tavin commented May 12, 2023

I'd be happy with an experimental interface and indeed I think it should be clearly documented as experimental.

In the future I'll be delighted if it's replaced with something better. What matters is the philosophy:

  • that labextension authors have some way to tune myst options
  • that it's possible to tune myst options based on the file or project (so not only from frontmatter -- e.g. we don't want to repeat the same _config.yml boilerplate in every markdown file in a project)

Thank you!

@agoose77
Copy link
Collaborator

@tavin I'll get to this early this week :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants