Wiki needs updated

[cewert]

There are still a couple references to viv in the wiki that need updated but, more importantly, are we allowed to have a wiki now???

We asked for years to have a wiki on our repo and were told no every time. That if we wanted to have docs for the client they needed to be hosted on the jellyfin website. So did the wiki go unnoticed and slip through or are we allowed to build out a wiki now? If the wiki is allowed then it would be nice to have confirmation before people start making PRs to add to it and if it's not allowed then we should make an issue to fix it 👍

[jimdogx]

Thanks. I've updated the Wiki. The content here is specific to developing against the Jellyfin Roku app and not general documentation around installing, setup, using, etc. 👍

[cewert]

You missed the viv reference on the wiki homepage.

It's client documentation which I was told had to be hosted on the website. Are you saying this was approved by leadership or not? What exactly is allowed and what isn't?

Why would a roku dev need to understand how deep linking works to write code for us? Isn't deep linking more of an advanced feature for power users who want to setup automations?

[cewert]

782030 - is the channel ID for Jellyfin. Without it, the Roku device does not know which channel to launch.

I don't recall what our app id is but I assume this is wrong because it's still the same value from when the wiki was first setup on viv.

[cewert]

Why can't we just add the deep linking stuff to the dev docs we already have?

[joshuaboniface]

It's client documentation which I was told had to be hosted on the website. Are you saying this was approved by leadership or not? What exactly is allowed and what isn't?

What I know we've said in the past is that we prefer client documentation to be on the website because then users can find it all in one central place. But this repo is less than 2 weeks old and things will take time to move and reorganize. Developer documentation does belong in the repo until the development docs site is ready, but whether that's in a Wiki or committed file is up to the repo owners.

[cewert]

Multiple people from the roku team have brought up having a wiki over the years and we were told no. We didn't have ownership of the repo at that time which is why we had to ask you guys to enable it for us but you said no. I'm not stressing about any of that though. Just confused about the current state of the new repo. There's been a ton of things changed so it's hard to keep up 😄

[joshuaboniface]

In that case let's consider the policy changed :) I personally have no issue with Wikis and in fact think they might be better than committed docs for a lot of things (developer-docs wise), maybe it was me who didn't like them in the past I don't recall any longer, but going forward I think this sort of setup is fine (and is mirrored by the Vue and Swiftfin, which are both similar out-of-org-adopted repos).