We could either link to that gist, or we could add a utility function to SG that people could use in their conf.py file. Would that be a compromise instead of "officially" supporting .ipynb?

I am fine having a utility function in sphinx-gallery, if "by use in their conf.py file", you mean that it is up to the user to write the code that finds all their notebooks, converts them to .py through our utility function (possibly they need to tweak the docstring with title and first short paragraph), and put them in a folder structure that sphinx-gallery expects (e.g. README.txt).

A few comments:

tests are needed to make sure this is working
one way to quickly test the utility function would be to run it on our generated notebooks and quickly browse the diff with our .py example
I'd be in favour of wording the doc to present this possibility as a manual one-off conversion: basically you convert all of your notebooks and then you can remove your notebooks from your repo. In other words notebooks are not supposed to be a first-class citizen input.
in the longer term if we have an optional dependency on pandoc we may as well revive Add optional pypandoc rst parsing #220 to do the rst -> md conversion.

Support jupyter notebooks #245

Description

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions