v3.0.0a1: Bump IDOM to 1.0.0 pre-release

[Archmonger]

Description

• Modify docs to use the upcoming IDOM-Core docs styling
  • Move docs python examples to individual files so we can run tests on them
  • CI for type checking + linting docs examples
  • Minor wording and section naming changes to feel more React-like
• Bump IDOM to 1.0.0 pre-release
  • Use the new idom.html API
  • Update package.json to be compatible with idom>=1.0.0
• Make the main requirements.txt be fully inclusive of all dev/user/docs dependencies to simplify development workflow
• Update setup.py to automatically install the latest NPM, and be easier to debug when things fail

Checklist:

Please update this checklist as you complete each item:

• Tests have been included for all bug fixes or added functionality.
• The changelog has been updated with any significant changes, if necessary.
• GitHub Issues which may be closed by this PR have been linked.

[Archmonger]

@rmorshea Can you pull down this branch and check out the new docs styling with mkdocs serve?

I went pretty deep into making it feel React-like.

[rmorshea]

requirements.txt is a little out of date with the current requirements/*.txt files. Can you update it to:

-r requirements/build-docs.txt
-r requirements/build-pkg.txt
-r requirements/check-style.txt
-r requirements/check-types.txt
-r requirements/dev-env.txt
-r requirements/pkg-deps.txt
-r requirements/test-env.txt
-r requirements/test-run.txt

[rmorshea]

Overall, I think the docs look great. I'm excited to have the core docs done in this style. The only criticism I have at the moment is that there may be some over reliance on admonitions. I don't have any alternate suggestions at the moment, but this is a thought I had when looking at this particular case:

[rmorshea]

I'm realizing I completely forgot to checkout this branch when I checked out the docs. The similarity to React's docs is uncanny! In some ways I prefer the mkdocs styling. I always found this part of the sidebar in the beta docs to be busy and distracting for some reason:

and since mkdocs doesn't have that the left sidebar is much more readable.

[Archmonger]

I considered replicating the react docs sidebar while doing this styling. But ultimately agreed with you that I think mkdocs layout is better.

Additionally if we did that, we'd be changing the mkdocs jinja templates, which is more prone to catastrophically breaking under future updates of mkdocs.

[Archmonger]

requirements.txt is a little out of date with the current requirements/*.txt files. Can you update it to:

I left test-run.txt out since it seems like you're already installing it within dev-env.txt. I will re-add it for completeness.

[rmorshea]

I say we get this in so it's easier to install and test out. Since it's a pre-release it shouldn't be a huge problem if its buggy.