On 06.10.25 10:29, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2025 at 18:47, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>
>> On 2025-10-03 Fr 10:41 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
>>
>> If you look at this more closely, creating postgres-full.xml and running
>> the syntax check perform the same operations, except that the latter
>> throws away the output. So it seems redundant to build a whole new code
>> path for this. I think you can make the check target dependent on
>> postgres-full.xml and be done, kind of like this (starting from
>> pre-b2922562726):
>>
>> Would it be unreasonable to discard the "check" target altogether?
>> It made sense back in the day when actually building the html docs
>> took many minutes. But I haven't used it in years, so I wonder
>> if anyone else has either.
>>
>> I have no objection. We'll need to work out what we're doing on the meson side, which is kinda where we came in ...
>
> I can work on this but I want to clarify it first. Which one do you prefer:
>
> 1- We won't have any command to do syntax checks (including tab and
> nbsp), these checks will automatically run when we generate docs.
>
> 2- We will have a 'check' target but it will only do tab and nbsp
> checks; xmllint will run only when generating the docs.
I don't know, people have a lot of individual workflows, and they are
not reading this thread. I still don't know what we are actually trying
to fix here, I just noticed that what was committed is flawed.
I would prefer that b2922562726 be reverted, and then someone start a
new thread with a descriptive change proposal.
