[monodocs] Fix build failure #5425
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Apolinario <[email protected]>
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5425 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 61.10% 61.99% +0.89%
==========================================
Files 793 611 -182
Lines 51164 36383 -14781
==========================================
- Hits 31265 22557 -8708
+ Misses 17027 11861 -5166
+ Partials 2872 1965 -907
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ You can run the workflow locally as follows: | |||
|
|
|||
| ```{rli} https://raw.githubusercontent.com/flyteorg/flytesnacks/master/examples/data_types_and_io/data_types_and_io/folder.py | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@neverett , this could have been caught in flyteorg/flytesnacks#1660 if this reference didn't mention master as the branch, but the branch name was not used, which means that only after this was merged to master the error manifests itself.
This seems to be a pattern in our docs, but I'm wondering if we shouldn't lean on a bit of automation to catch these at PR time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, we do reference master in all the places where we use the rli directive. I'm in favor of automation to catch these at PR time, although I'm not sure what that would look like -- I can make a Linear ticket to investigate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It turns out that we had another failure (fixed in #5428). Notice how in the aforementioned PR we're trading staleness (as in changes to the original file will not be reflected to the docs since we're pointing to a specific SHA) for consistency.
@neverett , can you open a Linear ticket to discuss which approach we should take going forward?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@eapolinario in the interest of avoiding build failures, I'll switch all rli URLs to SHAs for now, plus open a ticket so we can discuss how we want to approach this long term. When I started the work of separating docs from example code, the user guide examples were fairly stable, but they've seen a lot of activity in the last few weeks, and I assume will continue to be updated regularly going forward.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Apolinario <[email protected]>
Why are the changes needed?
We're seeing build failures (e.g. ) caused by flyteorg/flytesnacks#1660.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Update line numbers to match new lines.
How was this patch tested?
Setup process
Screenshots
Check all the applicable boxes
Related PRs
Docs link