fix docs format#2497
Conversation
steviez
left a comment
steviez
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two minor nitpicks, but on second thought, maybe we shouldn't be making those changes in this PR. So, I'd say go ahead and ship it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit, the first line above the diff should probably have a period at the end
to a specific public key TO to a specific public key.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit, the first line above the diff should probably have a period at the end
to a specific public key TO to a specific public key.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is an auto-generated file, so the next time we have to update it, there's a decent chance we hit this lint again 😕 Can we ignore the lint for this module?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good callout. Hypothetically, we could wait for that crate to update (assuming they pay attention to lints) or PR the crate ourselves
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or maybe we can ignore the lint for just this crate (like Tyera suggested above) ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sorry if I asked this before, but could you tell me how we generate those files? like what are the commands or libs we use? I guess it will be better if we can have a patch for the upstream 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
btw, I removed this docs change from this PR: e01da6e looks like it's worth to have another PR for discussing this one haha. will ping you guys there!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is an auto-generated file, so the next time we have to update it, there's a decent chance we hit this lint again
It looks like this might be the case for the changes made in: #1516
I removed this docs change from this PR
This seems like a good compromise for this PR.
sorry if I asked this before, but could you tell me how we generate those files? like what are the commands or libs we use?
I believe this script will do it:
https://github.com/anza-xyz/agave/blob/master/storage-bigtable/build-proto/build.sh
Running that script + doing git diff, I see some items that were removed in 1516 are added again. Seeing this, I'm now more in favor of Tyera's suggestion for ignoring more lints for these couple files
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ack, I forgot to follow up on 1516 and re-add that stuff.
Yes, the link Steve posted is the correct build script. We are using tonic_build to generate the files from the googleapi protobuf files, so we commit new files when that crate updates. There are a couple doc blocks that we have been manually adding ignore to, although we could potentially make the docs CI steps ignore these files, or pick some other approach instead.
Anyway, thanks for removing the google file from this PR.
|
sorry, I think I committed some wrong indent and broke the original meaning. just read the docs again and pushed some updates. 🫠 |
|
The Firedancer team maintains a line-for-line reimplementation of the |
|
force-pushed for fixing the conflict 🫠 |
* fix docs format * fix wrong indent * fix wrong indent * fix wrong indent * fix wrong indent * fix wrong indent * fix wrong indent * revert bigtable docs update
3 participants
(part of #2487)
Problem
docs take a stricter approach to indentation rules…
Summary of Changes
fix it