Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

documentation build #201

Open
asmodehn opened this issue Jul 31, 2017 · 8 comments
Open

documentation build #201

asmodehn opened this issue Jul 31, 2017 · 8 comments

Comments

@asmodehn
Copy link

Currently industrial_ci is testing build, run_tests, and install target.
It would be useful to include a doc build test, probably following the way the buildfarm does it, or something along the lines of http://wiki.ros.org/rosdoc_lite

@mathias-luedtke
Copy link
Member

Do have an example that could be used to test such a feature?

I am not sure if the buildfarm doc scripts could be used like the prerelease script, i.e. to test the merged code.
Running rosdoc_lite for each package could be an alternative.

@asmodehn
Copy link
Author

asmodehn commented Aug 1, 2017

My most documented package is https://github.com/pyros-dev/catkin_pip/tree/industrial_ci. Doc has been generated there previously by the buildfarm : http://docs.ros.org/indigo/api/catkin_pip/html/.

I am currently migrating it to use industrial_ci instead of my custom travis and shell scripts, so we can use that package for testing it.

Using rosdoc_lite should be fine, thats what I usually do locally.

@asmodehn
Copy link
Author

I recently made another package, much simpler, for testing this kind of thing : https://github.com/pyros-dev/ros1_template

@artivis
Copy link

artivis commented Oct 19, 2017

Might be interesting to look at catkin_tools_document a catkin_tool plugin for building documentation at workspace-level.

@mathias-luedtke
Copy link
Member

Thanks for pointing this out!
I have tried it, but I got stuck with #123 as doxgen writes temporary files to the src folder.
I will give it another try when I have more time.

@wxmerkt
Copy link
Contributor

wxmerkt commented Nov 22, 2018

We have run into the same issue - beyond doxygen (which writes into the read-only source directory, but can be redirected) we run automatic documentation on a built Python module (bindings from C++), i.e., can only work if that build artefact is available. Is there any example for building documentation or work-around? (I have seen the open PR on making it write-able but it seems to not have been merged/gotten stuck).

@agutenkunst
Copy link
Contributor

I would like to refresh this issue.

I recently added a rosdoc_lite check to our CI: PilzDE/psen_scan_v2@2d31822

It just validates that no warnings/errors are printed from rosdoc_lite. Unfortunately I had to filter some existing errors that would
need fixes upstream at rosdoc_lite see ros-infrastructure/rosdoc_lite#100

@ipa-mdl would you welcome a check for rosdoc_lite warnings/errors in industrial_ci?
I think it would fit in with CATKIN_LINT, CLANG_TIDY and PYLINT_CHECK.

@mathias-luedtke
Copy link
Member

would you welcome a check for rosdoc_lite warnings/errors in industrial_ci?
I think it would fit in with CATKIN_LINT, CLANG_TIDY and PYLINT_CHECK.

Definitely!
I could imagine to have a standalone test for it (similar to https://github.com/ros-industrial/industrial_ci/blob/master/industrial_ci/src/tests/black_check.sh).
Something like "tests/doc.sh" (if we want to extend it later) or "tests/rosdoc_lite.sh" ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants