The “GitHub Integration” suggestion is closed but currently the support is one-way.
Looking for two-way sync similar to gitbook
+1! This would be super helpful - would love to switch to Archbee if this happened, as it has more functionality in general. We have designers who prefer to use an in-site editor, while we also want our docs to be public and open source hosted on Github so the community can make changes to it too if needed.
Archbee looks lots more useful than Gitbook, but without 2-way sync, we will likely have to stay on Gitbook’s lesser feature set. We need engineers (in git) and non-engineers (web UI) able to collaborate in 1 repo.
Beyond that, having a permanent copy and revision history in github would be excellent for auditing of content and storing complete history in a way that already works in so many other tools.
Example: scan the documentation for API keys, login credentials, server addresses, etc. This is trivial when the context goes to Github. But would require custom integration to do with Archbee’s API.
This. Would switch from ReadMe if we had this. Would also love to see the tech writing features (snippets, knowledge map, templates, etc) integrate with markdown files in git.
We are currently analysing the two way sync implementation. However, in this case you will not be able to use all available blocks - in two way sync you will be able to use only elements that can be converted back to markdown(when sent back to git).
@Silviu could some of the elements be converted to HTML since markdown supports HTML too?
@Bad3r can you please detail your use case?
@Silviu sure! here is some points on why this integration will be useful:
Linking to GitHub Issues and Pull Requests: With the integration, users can link their documentation to relevant GitHub Issues and Pull Requests. This can help improve traceability and ensure that documentation is up-to-date with the latest changes in the code base.
Provide a single place to access code and documentation for developers. This can help improve communication and streamline workflows.
Local editing with familiar tools; this integration will allow users to edit documentation locally using their favorite editing tools, such as Vim or VS Code. Users can take advantage of the features, functionalities, and shortcuts they are familiar with. This can help improve efficiency.
Integration with other tools: By editing documentation locally, you can take advantage of integrations with other tools and plugins that are available for tools like Vim or VS Code. This can help you customize your editing experience and improve productivity.
Increased flexibility: This will make it easier to collaborate with others who may prefer using different tools or workflows