Fork me on GitHub

sorry if this has been covered before, but is there a way to use cljdoc with a pure deps.edn project? I have several projects which won't produce maven artifacts, but it appears cljdocs requires this?


just based on cljdoc ingest complaining


@hagmonk it’s definitely built around consuming jars but it’s now using tools.deps under the hood so it’s absolutely “within reach”


@martinklepsch looks like cljdoc.analysis.runner is one entrypoint ...


seems like the assumption that there is a POM is baked in to a lot of places, but at least tools.deps can dump one of those on demand ...


I'm working on a small demo of a deps.edn based monorepo. Initial cut is here: It would be awesome to use cljdocs to let people find their way around a project like this ... I'lll do something thinking and maybe some hacking if I've time later :) Such a project is likely to never produce any maven artifacts, so I'm motivated to find a way


@hagmonk is the intention to use this for applications and developer documentation or libraries? cljdoc is really focused on public libraries for now (you’re welcome to pay me for anything more commercially oriented)


internally I use a monorepo, but my handful of external deps.edn projects also won't produce an artifact (find-deps, depify), so it's not just with the monorepo in mind


I likely won’t spend time on this in the near future. My thinking for this is: if you provide a library to (external) users you should expose proper version numbers and a changelog. Also as far as I can tell this usecase mostly applies to tools.deps tooling libs, libraries that also target Leiningen and Boot users will need to publish jars anyways. If you are eager to see this happen I’m happy to help you get started, outline what needs to be done etc. 🙂


@martinklepsch sure - the direction I’m trying to explore is deliberately not publishing artifacts and version numbers, trying to take the tools.deps ideas as far as they can go. If I do any hacking on cljdocs I won’t need too much help, based on my reading so far, I think I can hack something together just to see what it feels like … but I will keep you posted!


Sounds good. Just so you’re aware, there are assumptions in many places that docs are built for some kind of artifact that has a group id and an artifact id — with git based deps the owner and repo name could become that but right now there’s no differentiation at the storage level for the “source” (i.e. GitHub or Maven)


Anyways, feel free to hit me up if you have any questions @hagmonk

👍 4