On 09/06/2012 12:13 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 8/29/12 11:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>>> Why does this need to be tied into the build farm? Someone can surely
>>> set up a script that just runs the docs build at every check-in, like it
>>> used to work. What's being proposed now just sounds like a lot of
>>> complication for little or no actual gain -- net loss in fact.
>>
>> It doesn't just build the docs. It makes the dist snapshots too.
>
> Thus making the turnaround time on a docs build even slower ... ?
>
>> And the old script often broke badly, IIRC.
>
> The script broke on occasion, but the main problem was that it wasn't
> monitored. Which is something that could have been fixed.
>
>> The current setup doesn't install
>> anything if the build fails, which is a distinct improvement.
>
> You mean it doesn't build the docs if the code build fails? Would that
> really be an improvement?
why would we want to publish docs for something that fails to build
and/or fails to pass regression testing - to me code and the docs for it
are a combined thing and there is no point in pushing docs for something
that fails even basic testing...
Stefan
