Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change short options for 'jekyll docs' #1542

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

maul-esel
Copy link

I'd expect the short versions of the options for jekyll docs to be the same as for jekyll serve. Or is there any reason to name them differently?

Minor backwards-incompatibility in the interface, but IMHO really tolerable.

@parkr
Copy link
Member

parkr commented Sep 13, 2013

I'm ambivalent. @mattr-?

@mattr-
Copy link
Member

mattr- commented Sep 20, 2013

When did we add the docs command? How many versions has it been different from serve?

Based on the answers to those questions, I don't think this is a change we can introduce right now since the docs command has been present since 1.1. Making it compatible with serve is a backwards incompatible change in one of our public APIs and would required a major version bump from my point of view. This is a very strict interpretation of SemVer, but one that I think serves us best in the long run.

@parkr
Copy link
Member

parkr commented Sep 20, 2013

Fair and I agree with the strict interpretation of SemVer, but I think the significance of changing these is a bit overblown. I'd be most concerned with breaking scripts that run docs command (e.g. script/offline launches docs server in background and a server for the current site) where the default port would cause conflict.

I'd be inclined to say this is such a minor change that the significance of the backwards-compatibility is small. If only we could deprecate it more nicely (by offering -p but printing a warning message)...

@kelvinst
Copy link

I like the deprecation proposal, keep the original behavior by now with a warning of deprecated option is good enough for me. Maybe after 2.0 we can cut the old option off...

@parkr
Copy link
Member

parkr commented Dec 26, 2013

Ready for these 💃

Can you please submit a new PR? mojombo:master is 💀

@parkr parkr closed this Dec 26, 2013
@maul-esel maul-esel deleted the consistent-options branch December 26, 2013 21:06
@jekyll jekyll locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 27, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants