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

Missing docs for resource types + general configs #3964

Open
1 task done
dbeatty10 opened this issue Aug 21, 2023 · 4 comments
Open
1 task done

Missing docs for resource types + general configs #3964

dbeatty10 opened this issue Aug 21, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
content Improvements or additions to content improvement Use this when an area of the docs needs improvement as it's currently unclear priority: high Technical inaccuracy, missing/incorrect information, or broken links. Negatively affects workflows size: medium This change will take up to a week to address

Comments

@dbeatty10
Copy link
Contributor

dbeatty10 commented Aug 21, 2023

Contributions

  • I have read the contribution docs, and understand what's expected of me.

Link to the page on docs.getdbt.com requiring updates

See below.

What part(s) of the page would you like to see updated?

There is a many-to-many relationship between resource types and general configs. Each resource type has its own docs page as does each general config. These pages should refer to each other both(!) directions when a general config is applicable to a particular resource type.

The ✅ below is when a link exists in at least one direction, and the ☑️ are when something is linked one direction, but not the other.

⚠️ The tables below only point out where there is internal inconsistency; it does not highlight any potential instances where existing links are incorrect or utterly incomplete.

Look at it one direction

The ☑️ below indicate that a general config page (like enabled contains an example for a resource type (like metrics), but the config page for the resource type is missing a similar example.

models seeds snapshots tests sources analyses exposures macros metrics
enabled ☑️
tags
pre-hook
pre-hook
database
schema ☑️
alias
persist_docs ☑️
full_refresh
meta ☑️ ☑️ ☑️ ☑️
grants
contract

Look at it the other direction

The ☑️ below indicate that a resource type page (like analyses) contains an example for a general config (like tags, but the page for the general config is missing a similar example.

models seeds snapshots tests sources analyses exposures macros metrics
enabled
tags ☑️ ☑️
pre-hook
pre-hook
database ☑️ ☑️
schema ☑️ ☑️ ☑️
alias ☑️ ☑️ ☑️
persist_docs
full_refresh
meta
grants
contract

Additional information

No response

@dbeatty10 dbeatty10 added content Improvements or additions to content improvement Use this when an area of the docs needs improvement as it's currently unclear labels Aug 21, 2023
@runleonarun runleonarun added priority: high Technical inaccuracy, missing/incorrect information, or broken links. Negatively affects workflows size: medium This change will take up to a week to address labels Aug 22, 2023
@runleonarun
Copy link
Collaborator

This is such a helpful way of looking at it Doug!

@mirnawong1
Copy link
Contributor

Mirna to hardcode table

@dbeatty10
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note: these tables are just showing the docs pages that currently exist (or not) -- they are not necessarily fully showing the which configs are available for each resource type. But creating such a table could be helpful too!

@mirnawong1
Copy link
Contributor

mirnawong1 commented Oct 24, 2024

hey @dbeatty10 , i've dug into this a little bit and if I'm not mistaken, it looks like the following docs need adding so they link to each other. however, there are some resources where it's either not supported or under the 'properties' page:

action needed

no action needed

  • persist docs - source = not supported so seems like no linking is needed
  • meta - analyses = The meta config is not currently supported for analyses. so seems like no linking is needed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
content Improvements or additions to content improvement Use this when an area of the docs needs improvement as it's currently unclear priority: high Technical inaccuracy, missing/incorrect information, or broken links. Negatively affects workflows size: medium This change will take up to a week to address
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants