Re: [talk] why it'd be great to have web interface for submittingsimple doc patches

[Julien Rioux]

On 07/10/2012 5:33 AM, Phil Holmes wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Rushton Wakeling"
> <address@hidden>
> To: "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
> Cc: "James" <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 5:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [talk] why it'd be great to have web interface for
> submittingsimple doc patches
>
>
> > On 10/06/2012 05:46 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
> > > As you say, compile-edit-compile cycles are shorter than the full
> > > build, but can
> > > occasionally not reveal errors, so for a proper test it's always
> > > better to nuke
> > > the build directory and rebuild from scratch.
> >
> > Out of curiosity, what kind of errors?  I imagine stuff involving
> > cross-references, the index, etc.?
>
>
> It's more that there are a variety of outputs generated from the doc
> source - pdf, split html, large html, info, etc. - to be sure that the
> source is OK you need to be certain all have been generated and
> therefore checked, and the simplest way of ensuring that is from a clean
> build.
>
> --
> Phil Holmes

It should be possible to avoid make clean. There will be a need for make 
doc-clean when moving or removing an included file. Other cases should 
be considered as bugs. If you witness that something doesn't get 
regenerated after you modified a file, please file it as a bug.

--
Julien