[Rubygems-developers] [ANNOUNCE] RubyGems Release 0.8.11

Chad Fowler chad at chadfowler.com
Thu Jul 14 08:37:14 EDT 2005


On 14-Jul-05, at 6:31 AM, Hugh Sasse wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Jim Weirich wrote:
>
>
>> = Announce: RubyGems Release 0.8.11
>>
>
> This patch I sent never made it.  Is it fundamentally flawed, or
> does it need specific tweaking?
>
>         Hugh
>
>
> --- ./lib/rubygems/doc_manager.rb.orig  2005-02-28  
> 23:26:58.000000000 +0000
> +++ ./lib/rubygems/doc_manager.rb       2005-06-10  
> 12:42:58.927496000 +0100
> @@ -35,7 +35,8 @@
>      end
>
>      def generate_rdoc
> -      return if @spec.has_rdoc == false
> +      # return if @spec.has_rdoc == false
> +      # Now taken care of with rescue clause.
>        require 'fileutils'
>        Gem::FilePermissionError.new(@doc_dir) if File.exist? 
> (@doc_dir) && !File.writable?(@doc_dir)
>        FileUtils.mkdir_p @doc_dir unless File.exist?(@doc_dir)
> @@ -58,6 +59,8 @@
>              r.document(['--quiet', '--op', rdoc_dir] +  
> @rdoc_args.flatten + source_dirs)
>            rescue Errno::EACCES => e
>              raise Gem::FilePermissionError.new(File.dirname 
> (e.message.split("-")[1].strip))
> +          rescue => e
> +            say "Performing RDoc failed with \"#{e.message}\", but  
> it is known to crash occasionally"
>            end
>          #TODO: Why is this throwing an error?
>            #ri = RDoc::RDoc.new
>


Sorry, Hugh.  I think that was a simple miss on our part.

Though, now that I went to add it, it seems like the first line  
_should_ return if @spec.has_rdoc == false and the rdoc flag wasn't  
passed on the command line.  That would
give the gem author the ability to control default behavior and the  
end user the ability to override it.  What do you think?

Chad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygems-developers/attachments/20050714/745e36bd/attachment-0001.htm


More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list