Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Document the "SDKs only" method waitForTask #2171

Closed
brunoocasali opened this issue Feb 15, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed

Document the "SDKs only" method waitForTask #2171

brunoocasali opened this issue Feb 15, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@brunoocasali
Copy link
Member

An excellent context can be found here: meilisearch/integration-guides#243.

Also, I've discussed this privately with @dichotommy proposing the creation of a section in the docs where we can adequately document the usage of this kind of function.

The subject is this method, which is present in every SDK:
https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch-php/blob/main/src/Endpoints/Delegates/HandlesTasks.php#L38

What we expect to be present in the docs is:

  • Why you should be careful to use this method.
  • What happens when you use this method.
  • How to use this method if you are willing to take risks.
  • How to customize the method parameters to make it eternal if you want to.

CC: @meilisearch/integration-team (let me know if I miss anything)

@guimachiavelli
Copy link
Member

@meilisearch/integration-team, is this still relevant?

@brunoocasali
Copy link
Member Author

By using the wait_for-like methods the user should be aware of major performance bottlenecks they could face if used recklessly.
For example, if you have a waitFor and your instance is processing a dump, you may wait minutes in the thread, causing the user a bad experience, keeping other services waiting like database queries, and much more.

So, it would be nice to document that in an official way, but I don't know how integrations-only content would fit in the docs these days 🤔. I also don't know about your other priorities, so it is up to you! I would classify this issue as a "nice to have" :)

@guimachiavelli
Copy link
Member

Yeah, so, a while ago (early 2023, pre-layoffs) I did some research on SDK documentation and it's a bit of a huge topic. We got two main takeaways from it:

  • With our resources, each SDK should have their docs in whatever format is most common for each language (e.g. rustdoc for Rust and so on)
  • Due to how SDKs are very tightly connected to each language (and its accompanying common best practices and etc), documentation of multiple SDKs should be more of a joint effort between technical writer and programmer

Given how most of our SDKs are not even maintained by us nowadays, and how SDKs are not a strategic focus right now and for the foreseeable future, I'm closing this as not planned.

@guimachiavelli guimachiavelli closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Mar 26, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants