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

Fixed extra links example #1016

Merged

Conversation

piotr-zyskowski-rai
Copy link
Contributor

PR description

This PR fixes extra links field example in the docs.

Why is it needed?

Documentation describing need/req's extra links has an incorrect example - outgoing dictionary entry is missing:

# conf.py
needs_extra_links = [
   {
      "option": "blocks",
      "incoming": "is blocked by",
   },
   {
      "option": "tests",
      "incoming": "is tested by",
      "copy": False,
      "color": "#00AA00"
   }
]

When used it causes this error:

Extension error (sphinx_needs.directives.need):
Handler <function process_need_nodes at 0x7f5d5123e9e0> for event 'doctree-resolved' threw an exception (exception: 'outgoing')

Documentation of needs_extra_links (here) states that the outgoing field is necessary and the example above is unnecessarily misleading.

@danwos
Copy link
Member

danwos commented Sep 10, 2023

Thanks for fixing the docs 👍

@danwos danwos merged commit a0ba9b4 into useblocks:master Sep 10, 2023
12 checks passed
@piotr-zyskowski-rai piotr-zyskowski-rai deleted the doc/fix-extra-links-example branch September 10, 2023 17:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants