Thanks for raising these questions! A few random thoughts that immediately occur to me:
My general bias is that CI infrastructure is uneconomic for this project[1], given the amount of effort I'm willing to put into Anarki at this point. But I have absolutely no objection to others continuing to maintain it.
I'd be fine with having a more complex set of instructions for contributors than newcomers. I'm totally willing to perform those commands for myself when I make changes to Anarki.
I'd also be ok with undoing some of this complexity if you want to do that, though I don't mean to push for that in any way.
I think it's also not super onerous to require people to manually update the docs when making changes. That way we can get rid of gh-pages, and configure Github to just rebuild docs from the trunk branch. That eliminates one use case for CI.
Your final proposal is also fine, though as you mentioned someone would have to implement it.. :)
[1] As context, I also plan to remove CI from the project I _do_ actively work on.
I appreciate your frankness, lol. Anarki maintenance happens whenever we feel like it. :-p I have been feeling an inkling of an Arc urge lately, hence this post, but I have other priorities right now that this is basically procrastination from.
What do you mean by getting GitHub to build docs from the trunk branch? That's what that part of the CI script is there to simulate; I think there's still no actual way to configure GitHub Pages to build from anything but a `gh-pages` branch or a `<username>.github.io` repository.
Oh, I see, you're right. I checked that settings page, but the big blank "social preview" image made me think I was at the end of the page, so I forgot I could scroll down. That's interesting.
