First draft for read the doc integration

[fredboudon]

I propose a very first draft for readthedoc integration. To discuss on this pull request.

[thomasarsouze]

Suggested change

	if: ${{ inputs.rtds_webhook_url != '' && inputs.rtds_webhook_token == ''}}
	if: ${{ inputs.rtds_webhook_url != '' && inputs.rtds_webhook_token != ''}}

[thomasarsouze]

Thanks for the initiative @fredboudon .

More than the technical implementation, my question about this is concerns the interest of this approach:

• Should we insert the doc building inside the action-build-publish-anaconda action ? - One clear advantage is that it makes more uniform all processes associated with package building in OpenAlea (but then, should we also insert the tests for example ?).
• Drawbacks are that we add another two of many parameters and this gets difficult to apprehend (even if most of them have default values or are not mandatory).
• Also, we lose in flexibility : unless we take care of the different cases, we have to stick to readthedocs (i.e. only sphinx and MkDocs so far, if I'm not wrong)
• Finally, having a separate GH-action for building doc would make it more flexible: not need for specific hack as proposed here, and possibility to build the doc when the developper wants (push at master, or tag, or ...). This is probably more in line with classical devops workflow.

I see advantages / disadvantages, so I have no firm opinion about it. What do you think ? Also, maybe an opinion @pradal ?

[pradal]

Thanks guys.
Things are moving up.
I would vote for a separate action to build the doc.
I do not want to stop the packaging due to doc errors.
And I want to focus only on doc at some moment.

Is it a replacement of readthedoc service? Not clear for me...

[fredboudon]

I agree that a separate workflow would have some advantages. Still the documentation requires the package to be built (to generate the API documentation). This is why I put everything in the same workflow. In a case of separated workflow, we should investigate how to trigger a second workflow (documentation) after a first one (package build). Maybe you've already looked to this ? Or you have other idea to coordinate the 2 workflows ?

[pradal]

In fact each workflow is composed of several tasks that are linked in a specific order.
@thomasarsouze explain one solution in an issue: openalea/github-action-conda-build#2 (comment)