Review: changes requested — fix checklist before re-review

Thanks for the honest-install replacement direction — the goal of not pointing readers at non-existent PyPI packages is right. But this PR as written is a regression in user experience (broken pip install → confused pip install against a 404) and adds a CI workflow that fails on the very branch it lives on. Four blockers, in order:

1. Self-hosted pypi-index URL is 404

https://coding-dev-tools.github.io/pypi-index/simple/ returns HTTP 404. Verified by gh api — Coding-Dev-Tools/pypi-index is private and GitHub Pages is not enabled (repos/Coding-Dev-Tools/pypi-index/pages → 404 Not Found). Hardcoding this URL into 13 files means most readers get "no matching distribution found" — strictly worse than the original "package not on PyPI" error.

Options to fix:

• (a) Enable GitHub Pages on pypi-index publicly and actually publish wheels for apiauth, envault, apighost, click-to-mcp, schemaforge there. Verify https://coding-dev-tools.github.io/pypi-index/simple/apiauth/ returns valid simple-index HTML before merging.
• (b) Drop the self-hosted-index prefix entirely; keep only pip install git+https://github.com/Coding-Dev-Tools/<tool>.git as the install command. Honest about what's actually available.
• (c) Publish the packages to PyPI proper so the original pip install apiauth works. Most user-friendly but out of scope for this PR.

I'd recommend (a) if the self-hosted index is the strategic direction, or (b) if not.

2. New CI workflow is structurally unrunnable on this PR

.github/workflows/ci.yml step 1 is python -m pip install -e . and fails immediately with:

error: Multiple top-level packages discovered in a flat-layout: ['blog', 'drafts']

Verified locally on pr-57 and on main. This is a pre-existing packaging defect introduced by PR #56 "chore: add standard project scaffolding + pyproject metadata" — no tool.setuptools.packages.find directive was configured, so setuptools sees blog/ and drafts/ as packages and refuses.

Fix in pyproject.toml:

[tool.setuptools.packages.find]
where = ["."]
include = ["linkcheck*"]
exclude = ["blog*", "drafts*", "tests*"]

(or, if restructuring is planned, switch to packages = [{include = "linkcheck"}] after moving source into src/.)

3. ruff check fails on E402 in two test files

E402 Module level import not at top of file
  --> tests/test_linkcheck_additional.py:14:1
  --> tests/test_linkcheck_edge_cases.py:19:1

Both because they do sys.path.insert(0, str(_SCRIPT_DIR)) then from linkcheck import .... Standard fix: either set tool.ruff.lint.per-file-ignores = {"tests/**/*.py" = ["E402"]} in pyproject.toml, or move the path setup to a conftest.py and use rootdir configuration. Pick one; document the choice.

4. HTML rendering bug: <br> inside <pre><code>

Three of the line-break insertions use <br> inside <pre><code> blocks, where it renders as the literal text <br> rather than a line break:

• blog/apiauth-audit-api-credentials-catch-expired-revoked-keys.html:99
• blog/apiauth-audit-api-credentials-catch-expired-revoked-keys.html:563
• blog/python-cli-type-safe-pep561.html:267

In <pre> blocks, line breaks are already real newlines in the source. Replace the <br>\n with a literal \n (real newline in the HTML). The other 45 sites in this diff are in non-<pre> HTML flow context (<p>, <div class="cmd-block">, etc.) where <br> does work — leave those alone.

5. (non-blocker) _config.yml is dead config

The repo intentionally uses .nojekyll to skip Jekyll processing on GitHub Pages. A _config.yml is a Jekyll config and is never read. Drop it to reduce noise.

Sequence

Please do not rebase #57 on top of broken main — that would compound the problem. The right sequence is:

1. Land a prerequisite fix PR against main covering items 2, 3, 5 (packaging, ruff, dead config). The pypi-index decision (item 1) may also need to land first if you go with option (a) — coordinate with whoever owns pypi-index.
2. After main is healthy, rebase docs(site): replace broken 'pip install' with self-hosted index #57 on top of the fixed main.
3. Address item 4 (the three <pre><code> rendering sites).
4. Re-request review. I (or another reviewer) will verify the CI workflow actually runs green on the rebased branch.

Apologies for the friction — items 2 and 3 are pre-existing main issues that just hadn't surfaced because the repo has no CI running. Once item 1 is resolved and items 2–5 are fixed, the resulting PR will be a clean win.

Closing: The ci.yml workflow was added to main via PR#61. The blog file modifications conflict with current main. Please create a fresh PR rebased on main if blog updates are still needed.

Generated by Claude Code