This page is no longer maintained — Please continue to the home page at www.scala-lang.org

Nightly ScalaDoc

8 replies
dcsobral
Joined: 2009-04-23,
User offline. Last seen 38 weeks 5 days ago.
I was looking today at the nightly Scaladoc when I noticed it linked to the 2.9.2 branch. Could we please have it pointing to trunk again?

And, by the way, there were dozens of improvements to the Scaladoc tool *and* to Scala API docs on trunk. Can we have them backported *before* 2.9.2 is out? I volunteer to track down all commits if the answer is positive.

--
Daniel C. Sobral

I travel to the future all the time.
extempore
Joined: 2008-12-17,
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 3 days ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc


On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Daniel Sobral <dcsobral [at] gmail [dot] com> wrote:
And, by the way, there were dozens of improvements to the Scaladoc tool *and* to Scala API docs on trunk. Can we have them backported *before* 2.9.2 is out? I volunteer to track down all commits if the answer is positive.

There's no reason we wouldn't include API doc improvements.  With scaladoc it's the usual question of maintaining binary compatibility.  You don't have to stop at finding the commits - there's a 2.9.x branch on github, you can send pull requests against that as well as against trunk.
I have been tagging commits I want in 2.9.2 as "2.9.2" on jira.  That doesn't mean they will be in 2.9.2, it just means I want them in 2.9.2.  There's nothing stopping other people from doing the same tagging, which may be a mixed blessing and if it's abused it will make me sad.  Commits proposed for backporting should be localized bugfixes which are not obvious binary compatibility breakers.  (It's not the end of the world if you're wrong about binary compat because the tool will catch it, but it saves time to exclude the impossible.)
Simon Ochsenreither
Joined: 2011-07-17,
User offline. Last seen 42 years 45 weeks ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc
Hi,

any chance to fix this?

Thanks and bye,


Simon
Joshua.Suereth
Joined: 2008-09-02,
User offline. Last seen 32 weeks 5 days ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc

Feel free to open a verified pull request. Before one of us has a chance to get to this.

On Jan 9, 2012 12:49 PM, "Simon Ochsenreither" <simon [dot] ochsenreither [at] googlemail [dot] com> wrote:
Hi,

any chance to fix this?

Thanks and bye,


Simon
Simon Ochsenreither
Joined: 2011-07-17,
User offline. Last seen 42 years 45 weeks ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc
I have really no idea where the code doing it lives. It is not on GitHub afaik.
dcsobral
Joined: 2009-04-23,
User offline. Last seen 38 weeks 5 days ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 17:46, Simon Ochsenreither
wrote:
> I have really no idea where the code doing it lives. It is not on GitHub
> afaik.

Huh? AFAIK, scaladoc is part of the scala project, and, furthermore,
the doc improvements themselves are just commits on the libraries that
can be mostly cherry-picked.

Simon Ochsenreither
Joined: 2011-07-17,
User offline. Last seen 42 years 45 weeks ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc
Sorry, I meant this:

I was looking today at the nightly Scaladoc when I noticed it linked to the 2.9.2 branch. Could we please have it pointing to trunk again?

Bye!
Pedro Furlanetto
Joined: 2009-08-19,
User offline. Last seen 2 years 34 weeks ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc

https://github.com/scala/scala.github.com and try http://scala.github.com.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Simon Ochsenreither
wrote:
> Sorry, I meant this:
>
>
>> I was looking today at the nightly Scaladoc when I noticed it linked to
>> the 2.9.2 branch. Could we please have it pointing to trunk again?
>
>
> Bye!

Simon Ochsenreither
Joined: 2011-07-17,
User offline. Last seen 42 years 45 weeks ago.
Re: Nightly ScalaDoc
Hi!

Do I miss something completely obvious?

Yes, the "Nightly" link in scala.github.com also uses 2.9.2 instead of trunk.

As far as I know the generation of the nightly ScalaDoc happens somewhere in Jenkins and that stuff is not on GitHub.

Maybe the person who has changed could just reverse it (or at least tell people why it was changed)?

Thanks and bye,

Simon

Copyright © 2012 École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland