Fix nightly build by updating branch name from "dev" to "main"

[jdblischak]

Closes #791

Follow-up to #789

cc: @ihnorton, @johnkerl

What is the plan for rebuilding the documentation? Similar to the update from @cgiachalis in #794, the updates to _pkgdown.yml and vignette .Rmd files will not be reflected in docs/ until they are rebuilt. Can I send a follow-up PR to rebuild them?

[jdblischak]

I manually triggered a nightly build on my fork to run against this PR branch: https://github.com/jdblischak/TileDB-R/actions/runs/12676759606

[johnkerl]

Can I send a follow-up PR to rebuild them?

Yes please, and if you don't, I can

FYI we found out it needs to be Rscript -e 'pkgdown::build_site()' not pkgdown::build_site() at the R prompt. I don't know why.

[johnkerl]

🚢

[johnkerl]

FYI we found out it needs to be Rscript -e 'pkgdown::build_site()' not pkgdown::build_site() at the R prompt. I don't know why.

Or @mojaveazure was it the other way around? From our internal release procedure it seems so ...

[mojaveazure]

Building documentation should be Rscript -e 'pkgdown::build_site()' as calling this without the parentheses will simply print the function definition

$ Rscript -e 'pkgdown::build_site'
function (pkg = ".", examples = TRUE, run_dont_run = FALSE, seed = 1014L,
    lazy = FALSE, override = list(), preview = NA, devel = FALSE,
    new_process = !devel, install = !devel)
{
    pkg <- as_pkgdown(pkg, override = override)
    check_bool(devel)
    check_bool(new_process)
    check_bool(install)
    if (install) {
        withr::local_temp_libpaths()
        cli::cli_rule("Installing package {.pkg {pkg$package}} into temporary library")
        withr::with_options(list(keep.source.pkgs = TRUE, keep.parse.data.pkgs = TRUE),
            utils::install.packages(pkg$src_path, repos = NULL,
                type = "source", quiet = TRUE))
    }
    if (new_process) {
        build_site_external(pkg = pkg, examples = examples, run_dont_run = run_dont_run,
            seed = seed, lazy = lazy, override = override, preview = preview,
            devel = devel)
    }
    else {
        build_site_local(pkg = pkg, examples = examples, run_dont_run = run_dont_run,
            seed = seed, lazy = lazy, override = override, preview = preview,
            devel = devel)
    }
}
<bytecode: 0x559da6add3c0>
<environment: namespace:pkgdown>

Also, we should consider moving the pkgdown process and docs to separate workflows and to deploy from either a gh-pages branch or as an artifact so that 1) we don't have to remember to build before release and 2) it simplifies other CI (SeuratObject deploys from a branch)

[cgiachalis]

Yes, I didn't rebuild it on purpose. Initially, I thought it should be auto deployed via gh pages...on the wild you will come across dev and prod pkddown deployments.

[johnkerl]

Building documentation should be Rscript -e 'pkgdown::build_site()' as calling this without the parentheses will simply print the function definition

@mojaveazure I corrected my typo above w/ the missing ()

In any case -- the question is whether to use Rscript or R interactively ...

[johnkerl]

Also, we should consider moving the pkgdown process and docs to separate workflows and to deploy from either a gh-pages branch or as an artifact so that 1) we don't have to remember to build before release and 2) it simplifies other CI (SeuratObject deploys from a branch)

#798

[mojaveazure]

In any case -- the question is whether to use Rscript or R interactively ...

That shouldn't matter as unlike devtools::document pkgdown just reads documentation files, it doesn't generate anything on its own. For CI, I typically run it using shell: Rscript {0}

[johnkerl]

@mojaveazure I recall specifically we had a discussion that one way was better than the other, & it was you that told me this :)

Let me search GitHub history & sync up with you in Slack

[johnkerl]

To close the loop here publicly: It turns out I was remembering something about devtools::document() in R vs. Rscript -e 'devtools::document()'. Thanks for clarifying, @mojaveazure !

[jdblischak]

Can I send a follow-up PR to rebuild them?

Yes please, and if you don't, I can

Done in #799

we should consider moving the pkgdown process and docs to separate workflows

Agreed. I added my thoughts in #798 (comment) Happy to assist