Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@d247e55). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #6730   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   89.48%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      420           
  Lines             ?    75643           
  Branches          ?    12393           
=========================================
  Hits              ?    67690           
  Misses            ?     5142           
  Partials          ?     2811

CircleCI complaints are legitimate. I fixed a few of them but there are more

Thanks for fixing the sidebars. Circle is happy so looks like I got all the crossrefs... sorry i didn't test locally first (it takes forever on my laptop, and I don't have remote access to my UW machine at the moment because it changed subnets recently).

couple of comments
-- isn't the C API reference still being duplicated in the Manual?
-- what is the version of the manual here? It probably doesn't match the latest one, should we make a note of this?
-- the SSP was also part of the original manual? Is this part being duplicated still?

couple of comments
-- isn't the C API reference still being duplicated in the Manual?

it's content only exists on one page. It is listed in the Manual TOC because chapter 1 of the manual had similar summary tables of the commands. Do you think we should remove it from the manual TOC?

-- what is the version of the manual here? It probably doesn't match the latest one, should we make a note of this?

we refer to it as "The web version of Matti Hämäläinen’s original MNE-C manual". I don't know how close it is to the most current version, doesn't really seem worth the effort to go through with a fine-toothed comb to figure it out. What do you suggest for wording?

-- the SSP was also part of the original manual? Is this part being duplicated still?

I think the standalone SSP page covers different material than what's in the manual (and its examples are all Python-specific). But I'll double check.

Do you think we should remove it from the manual TOC?

I would say so, the TOC is too long to parse easily. We also have it here: https://15088-1301584-gh.circle-artifacts.com/0/dev/manual/c_reference.html#c-reference

What do you suggest for wording?

I was going to suggest linking to the actual pdf of the latest version and nuke the web version (but that may make @agramfort sad)

Do you think we should remove it from the manual TOC?

I would say so, the TOC is too long to parse easily. We also have it here: https://15088-1301584-gh.circle-artifacts.com/0/dev/manual/c_reference.html#c-reference

OK will do

What do you suggest for wording?

I was going to suggest linking to the actual pdf of the latest version and nuke the web version (but that may make @agramfort sad)

The PDF is behind a free-wall (users must log in with an account to even download it). Until that policy changes I don't think we should take down the HTML version.

@jasmainak you were right about the SSP being duplicated. I've fixed that now, and removed the C API from the manual TOC.

The PDF is behind a free-wall (users must log in with an account to even download it). Until that policy changes I don't think we should take down the HTML version.

I think this must change. I will talk to @mshamalainen tomorrow

OK. In the meantime I think we should still merge this when CIs come back green. If we need to decommision the whole set of manual pages it will be a larger effort (due to all the crossrefs pointing there) and we should probably get buy-in from more of the community first.

Thanks @drammock

So, just to finish the story @mshamalainen is totally fine with putting the pdf manual on github. Let me know if you need my help there.