[Rubygems-developers] --rdoc option does not have an effect

Gavin Sinclair gsinclair at soyabean.com.au
Fri Jun 10 23:29:39 EDT 2005

On Friday, June 10, 2005, 9:49:25 PM, Hugh wrote:

>> Actually, the rdoc spec is being used to avoid running rdoc on gems
>> that really have no rdoc (like "rails"). There was a case where
>> rdoc was crashing on one of these gems, and the author used the
>> rdoc spec attribute to explicitly stop rdoc from running.
>> Chad

> So what about something like this (untested) code (patch made
> against rubygems-0.8.10):

> [code]

> By which I mean, "we know it will fail sometimes and we don't know
> why yet, so let's trap those cases and carry on, because the world
> probably hasn't ended if we get no rdocs."

Good idea, Hugh.  I wasn't aware of the RDoc problem, but that's just
what it is: an RDoc problem.  It shouldn't be a Rubygems problem.  (We
should be able to assume that RDoc runs without error on any valid
Ruby code.)

My rationale is this: RDoc output is a useful code browser, even if
the author has included no comments.  So the "rdoc" setting is useful
to say "there is/isn't API documentation", and a gems GUI can convey
that information, but the RDoc output should be available for viewing


More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list