After re-reading my issue, I am guilty of some solutineering here 🙈😬 I added some thoughts to https://github.com/cljdoc/cljdoc/issues/478. As mentioned there, I am not planning to work on the issue for now. Mostly because I am too eager to explore potential features regarding https://github.com/cljdoc/cljdoc/issues/336 😉

I think I’m totally responsible for even talking about the iFrame stuff 😄 I hadn’t really considered that there could be security issues but I also completely agree that it makes sense to wait for some user feedback on the :url change first :)

I think it is wonderful that we can bounce ideas off each other in a friendly place of learning. I look forward to your gentle feedback on my next idea!

Hi. cljdoc-newbie. I just tried to build the docs for cryogen/lein-template, which failed. The build id is 40614. The error is "Could not locate leiningen/new/templates__init.class, leiningen/new/templates.clj or leiningen/new/templates.cljc on classpath.". FWIW, the docs (README) seems to have been built correctly, but the API docs has a note saying "https://cljdoc.org/builds/49664". Since this project is a template, there is no API as such. I'd like to know if there is anything I need to fix on the lein-template side. Thanks.

@dorab welcome to cljdoc!

Soo…. even though you don’t have an API, cljdoc currently assumes all projects do, and is analyzing your source code to find it so it can summarize it.

I’m not a lein guy, so not sure why cljdoc is failing to parse your sources. But… I expect you really would like to say, “hey cljdoc, don’t bother trying to parse my sources because I have no API”.

Correct. That would be best. Is there a current way to say that?

@dorab, no yet, no. But it seems like a reasonable feature to add.

@dorab, we seem to already have an https://github.com/cljdoc/cljdoc/issues/474. I’ll add your use case as a note.

The reason analysis fails is probably that leiningen uses template files where the namespace doesn’t match the classpath location

added note: https://github.com/cljdoc/cljdoc/issues/474#issuecomment-944975480