Fix issue where excluded packages can sometimes default to remote linking #2387
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #2382 and #1431. In particular, any remaining workarounds for #1431 are now suboptimal and should be removed as, depending on how it is implemented, it may disable remote linking (if using --exclude-packages).
Dartdoc was only half paying attention to the exclude packages flag -- assuming that if you excluded the package you wanted remote linking if it happened to be part of Flutter. That doesn't work, particularly when you are documenting Flutter itself and leads to #2382.
Also, clean up isPublicAndPackageDocumented now that we don't have to infer documentation status for packages from libraries like we did in the dark ages (breaking change for removal of
PackageGraph.packageDocumentedFor).