Work with rdoc ~> 4.0.0 #48

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into
from

4 participants

@command3r

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.

command3r added some commits Jun 7, 2013
@command3r command3r Update
Files:      57

Classes:     6 ( 0 undocumented)
Modules:     8 ( 4 undocumented)
Constants:   9 ( 9 undocumented)
Attributes:  5 ( 5 undocumented)
Methods:    47 (30 undocumented)

Total:      75 (48 undocumented)
 36.00% documented

Elapsed: 4.7s dependency
19ea258
@command3r command3r Fixes usages of rdoc a238ecf
@command3r command3r Fixes Generator to comply with rdoc ~> 4.0.0 b8001b5
@command3r command3r Use store to find file path as it's not included in TopLevel on rdoc 4.0 b9d1449
@strzibny

+1

We need this to package sdoc for Fedora, where we have RDoc 4.0.0 already.

@strzibny

Ping, can we merge this and release a new version? Or is there something that blocks it?

@zzak
Owner

I have been working on an upgrade to sdoc to include rdoc 4 support

https://github.com/zzak/sdoc/tree/rdoc-4

@strzibny

@zzak Good to know.

@mohawkjohn

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.)

@zzak
Owner
@mohawkjohn

Heh. Okay. Can you change this PR to be ~> 4.0.1 instead of 4.0.0?

@zzak
Owner
@strzibny

@zzak Would you like any help on this feature, so we have it sooner? What is actually missing?

@zzak
Owner
@strzibny

@zzak I looked on the code today, and with this (https://gist.github.com/strzibny/7136890) little fix, I was able to use sdoc to generate the documentation involving merging doc dirs with sdoc-merge. Since we don't have automated tests, I am not sure whether this is everything that needs to be done. Do you know about corner cases where it doesn't work? I am willing to work further on this.

@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.

@mohawkjohn

I guess I was referring more to the gemspec requirement of "~> 4.0.0". This means it has to be exactly 4.0.0 and not 4.0.1, right? 4.0.1 is a pretty minor revision — just adds support for C++ parsing.

@strzibny

@mohawkjohn That's why I was confused by your comment, ~> 4.0.0 means starting at 4.0.0 up to version 4.1.0 so it covers 4.0.1 just fine. The ~ operator is introduced to cover more minor versions that should not break api/abi compatibility (since major versions usually do that).

@mohawkjohn

Oh, great. I'm perfectly happy then. Thanks for your hard work!

@strzibny

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?

  • Took the latest released version (0.3.20)
  • Applied patches from the rdoc4 branch of zzak's fork
  • Made patches to rename search indexes to lib/rdoc/generator/template/sdoc/search_index.rhtml and lib/rdoc/generator/template/rails/search_index.rhtml
  • Applied my patches from #49 to add man pages
  • Applied my fix for sdoc --version from #54
  • Changed the version from 0.4.0 to 0.4.0.rc1

Then I made a build[1] and tried to test it against big projects like Katello and generating Rails api using rake doc:rails. Seems that it works.

I will soon update my review request to include the package to Fedora. After you decide to release 0.4.0, I will update the package accordingly. It would be really nice if @zzak branch could be merged with current @voloko master so everybody can submit relevant pull requests.

[1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6144450

@zzak
Owner

Also, this is a duplicate of #43 and I will be submitting a new PR soon, could we close this?

@zzak
Owner

Closing in favor of #56

@zzak zzak closed this Dec 21, 2013
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment