Link related Quarto templates from the README - #61
Conversation
Closes #36. Adds a "Related templates" section before Support, carrying the link the issue names plus the two lab siblings, each described by what it actually is: NOAA-quarto-book a `type: book` template that also builds PDF and docx qwt the Quarto website template, not a book rpt the R package template The issue asks for "other quarto book templates" and gives one link. The siblings are grouped separately and labelled as adjacent project types rather than book templates, because they are not: reading their READMEs, qwt is a website template and rpt is an R package template. Filing them under "other Quarto book templates" would have been wrong. All three URLs were confirmed to resolve with `git ls-remote` rather than curl, which the session proxy answers with 403 for github.com regardless of whether the repo exists. A fourth candidate template turned out not to exist and was dropped rather than guessed at. Edited README.Rmd and regenerated README.md with rmarkdown, per the generated- from header, rather than editing the output by hand. A fresh render also drops a blank line between the badges comments, which is a toolchain-version artifact unrelated to this change; that line is restored so the diff is additions only. Verified: README.md gains 15 lines and loses none; the new prose passes the semantic-line-break, list-item-splice and non-standard-character checks, run locally with CI's configuration. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Lx1hhHu58mXq9DfJsAxkHn
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Spellcheck went red on the four proper nouns the README section introduces:
docx, NOAA, qwt and rpt. Each is a real name (a file format, the NOAA
template, and two lab repositories) rather than a misspelling, so the fix is
the wordlist, which is what the failure message itself recommends.
Kept in C sort order to match the existing file.
Verified with spelling::spell_check_package("."), which is the package-aware
entry point the action uses and now reports nothing. Worth recording why that
matters: spell_check_files() on the two READMEs instead reports `qbt`, because
the package-aware path ignores the package's own name and the file-level one
does not. CI never flagged `qbt`, so the file-level result was an artifact of
the wrong entry point rather than a real second failure to chase.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Lx1hhHu58mXq9DfJsAxkHn
|
The failure is step 14, "Deploy PR Preview". Every step before it passed, including the ones that would catch a bad README: The book rendered. What failed is the push to The likely cause is contention I created: four PRs (#57, #58, #60, #61) were open at once, each deploying a preview to the same No re-run needed and none spent. The wordlist fix in Worth flagging beyond this PR: if concurrent preview deploys really do race, that will recur whenever several PRs are open together, which is normal for this repo. A Generated by Claude Code |
|
Claude finished review — View run ReviewThis round's diff ( Ordering check: the wordlist appears to be sorted case-sensitively (ASCII order, uppercase before lowercase) — Completeness: no other new out-of-dictionary tokens were introduced by the prior commit's prose ( No issues found in this round. The prior round's verdict (posted 2026-09-15T01:20:14Z, commit VerdictReady for merge Structured Review Data (JSON){
"schema_version": "1.1",
"reviewer": "claude",
"commit_sha": "ca2f8e80ac99f5b746bb7ea493cf885d699fa1b6",
"verdict": "CLEAN",
"findings": [],
"detailed_assessment": "inst/WORDLIST gained four entries (NOAA, docx, qwt, rpt) that exactly match the new proper nouns introduced in the already-reviewed README changes, with correct case-sensitive alphabetical placement and no stray or missing tokens.",
"holistic_assessment": "This follow-up commit only extends the spell-check wordlist to cover previously-reviewed documentation content, so it introduces no regression risk, no scope creep beyond issue #36, and requires no further validation beyond the prior round's approval."
}Reviewed commit: ff0b160 |
|
2 participants
Closes #36.
What changed
A "Related templates" section before Support, carrying the link the issue names plus the two lab siblings:
type: booktemplate that also builds PDF and docxWhy the siblings are grouped separately
The issue asks for "other quarto book templates." Only the NOAA one is that. Reading the siblings' READMEs,
qwtis a website template andrptis an R package template — so they're listed under a separate heading as adjacent project types. Filing them as book templates would have been simply false, and this PR series has already produced one committed claim about another repo that turned out to be wrong.A fourth candidate I considered doesn't exist at all;
git ls-remotesaid so, and it was dropped rather than guessed at.Verification
All three URLs confirmed live with
git ls-remote, notcurl— the session proxy answerscurl https://github.com/...with403whether or not the repo exists, so curl would have been useless as an existence check here.README.mdis generated fromREADME.Rmd, so the source was edited and the output regenerated withrmarkdownrather than hand-edited. One wrinkle worth naming: a fresh render also drops a blank line between thebadges: start/badges: endcomments, a toolchain-version artifact unrelated to this change. That line is restored, so the diff is 15 additions and 0 deletions rather than carrying unrelated churn.New prose passes the semantic-line-break, list-item-splice and non-standard-character checks, run locally with CI's configuration before pushing.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01Lx1hhHu58mXq9DfJsAxkHn
Generated by Claude Code