Skip to content

Add Table of Contents to README - #3005

Open
K-letir-rgb wants to merge 1 commit into
theupdateframework:developfrom
K-letir-rgb:K-letir-rgb-patch-1
Open

Add Table of Contents to README#3005
K-letir-rgb wants to merge 1 commit into
theupdateframework:developfrom
K-letir-rgb:K-letir-rgb-patch-1

Conversation

@K-letir-rgb

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Description of the changes being introduced by the pull request:

Adds a Table of Contents to the README for easier navigation, as suggested in #2654.

This is a small, focused change per @jku's feedback on the earlier PR (#2655) that README improvements should be split into minimal, single-purpose PRs rather than one large combined change. Happy to follow up with separate small PRs for other items from the list if this looks good.

This is a documentation-only change; no tests apply.

Addresses #2654 (partial - table of contents only)

Added a Table of Contents section to the README.

Signed-off-by: Karen Letir <letirkaren@gmail.com>
@K-letir-rgb
K-letir-rgb requested a review from a team as a code owner August 28, 2026 07:15
@jku

jku commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

My initial feedback is the same as in #2655:

GitHub already gives us an automatic Table of Contents (just click the hamburger menu) on https://github.com/theupdateframework/python-tuf ... With that in mind I'm not sure we want to add TOC that we have to manually maintain.

@K-letir-rgb

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

That's a fair point, I wasn't aware of the built-in GitHub TOC feature. Given that, would it still be useful to have an inline TOC for people viewing the raw README (e.g. via cat README.md, or a text editor, or in contexts where GitHub's rendering isn't available), or would you rather I close this and look at a different item from the list instead?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants