-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 137
Work with rdoc ~> 4.0.0 #48
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
Conversation
|
+1 We need this to package sdoc for Fedora, where we have RDoc 4.0.0 already. |
|
Ping, can we merge this and release a new version? Or is there something that blocks it? |
|
I have been working on an upgrade to sdoc to include rdoc 4 support |
|
@zzak Good to know. |
|
Awesome to hear this is in progress. We're running into an incompatibility between NMatrix and Rails 3.x related to rdoc; NMatrix requires rdoc >= 4.0.1, since NMatrix is written in C++ and rdoc can't read C++ init entry points prior to 4.0.1. Here's the issue: SciRuby/nmatrix#149 Any sense of a timeline? Thanks so much. (Incidentally, I love SDoc's output. Would definitely consider using with SciRuby / NMatrix.) |
|
I will have more time for this after rubyconf, glad to answer any questions you might have!
|
|
Heh. Okay. Can you change this PR to be ~> 4.0.1 instead of 4.0.0? |
|
I will update the version on my fork soon!
|
|
@zzak Would you like any help on this feature, so we have it sooner? What is actually missing? |
|
@strzibny If you would like to do a pair session sometime after rubyconf, i'd love some help!
|
|
@zzak I looked on the code today, and with this (https://gist.github.com/strzibny/7136890) little fix, I was able to use @MohawkJohn RDoc 4.0 is shipped with Ruby 2.0, so there is need for sdoc to work with RDoc 4.0.0 as well. If supporting RDoc 4.0.1 requires many other not-compatible changes, then I suggest merge and release a version for RDoc 4.0.0 and afterwards work on RDoc 4.0.1. |
|
I guess I was referring more to the gemspec requirement of |
|
@MohawkJohn That's why I was confused by your comment, |
|
Oh, great. I'm perfectly happy then. Thanks for your hard work! |
|
So, I looked into it again, and tried to make a 0.4.0 release candidate for Fedora. This can help people to test it or use it if they need to. So, what have I done?
Then I made a build[1] and tried to test it against big projects like Katello and generating Rails api using I will soon update my review request to include the package to Fedora. After you decide to release [1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6144450 |
|
Also, this is a duplicate of #43 and I will be submitting a new PR soon, could we close this? |
|
Closing in favor of #56 |
This could be an initial part of the implementation. I merely followed my way on making it work with the command I use, but it seems adequate to work with the latest version of the main tool.