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

Un-break build by making review-drafts/2023-07.wattsi use non-void <ref></ref> #9772

Conversation

sideshowbarker
Copy link
Contributor

@sideshowbarker sideshowbarker commented Sep 22, 2023

See #9400 (comment).

The build is currently broken, because when the build gets to the point of generating the SNAP variant, it tries to run the review-drafts/2023-07.wattsi file through wattsi. That file has void <ref spec=FOO> elements, but after it was published we changed wattsi to no longer recognize <ref> as a void element, but to instead expect it to have both a start tag and end tag and text content: <ref>FOO</ref>

So this change replaces all the void <ref spec=FOO> elements with <ref>FOO</ref> elements.

@sideshowbarker sideshowbarker force-pushed the sideshowbarker/review-drafts/2023-07.wattsi-reformat branch from fa29ae4 to 0da9692 Compare September 22, 2023 07:49
@sideshowbarker sideshowbarker force-pushed the sideshowbarker/review-drafts/2023-07.wattsi-reformat branch from 0da9692 to 9293c94 Compare September 22, 2023 07:52
@sideshowbarker sideshowbarker changed the title Un-break local build by making review-drafts/2023-07.wattsi use non-void <ref></ref> Un-break build by making review-drafts/2023-07.wattsi use non-void <ref></ref> Sep 22, 2023
@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Sep 22, 2023

SNAP (commit snapshot) variants are unrelated to REVIEW-DRAFT (review draft) variants.

I suspect the PR in question needs rebasing. Or maybe, someone snuck a void <ref> into the main branch somehow.

@sideshowbarker
Copy link
Contributor Author

SNAP (commit snapshot) variants are unrelated to REVIEW-DRAFT (review draft) variants.

I suspect the PR in question needs rebasing. Or maybe, someone snuck a void <ref> into the main branch somehow.

hmm, OK, I’ll try rebasing it

@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Sep 22, 2023

Yeah right now it has a giant merge commit. Using a merge commit across such a large spec change seems unlikely to work well. I'd suggest squashing into a single commit and rebasing that on main.

@sideshowbarker
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah right now it has a giant merge commit. Using a merge commit across such a large spec change seems unlikely to work well. I'd suggest squashing into a single commit and rebasing that on main.

Thanks much — that seems to have fixed it

@sideshowbarker sideshowbarker deleted the sideshowbarker/review-drafts/2023-07.wattsi-reformat branch September 22, 2023 08:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants