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

more features tested in cargo doc ci step #694

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Vrixyz
Copy link
Contributor

@Vrixyz Vrixyz commented Jul 19, 2024

Copy link
Contributor

@waywardmonkeys waywardmonkeys left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems like there are 3 changes here, so maybe 3 commits are better.

@waywardmonkeys
Copy link
Contributor

FWIW, I had a branch that I hadn't submitted yet and it was:

commit b9190be36915b2a7d042215fdf10ce9364b4b6fb (ci-check-features-cargo-doc)
Author: Bruce Mitchener <bruce.mitchener@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu Jul 18 08:04:49 2024 +0700

    ci: Enable same features as docs.rs in cargo doc

diff --git a/.github/workflows/rapier-ci-build.yml b/.github/workflows/rapier-ci-build.yml
index 984bb86..3962323 100644
--- a/.github/workflows/rapier-ci-build.yml
+++ b/.github/workflows/rapier-ci-build.yml
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ jobs:
     steps:
       - uses: actions/checkout@v4
       - name: Cargo doc
-        run: cargo doc -p rapier3d -p rapier2d -p rapier3d-stl -p rapier3d-urdf
+        run: cargo doc --features parallel,simd-stable,serde-serialize,debug-render -p rapier3d -p rapier2d -p rapier3d-stl -p rapier3d-urdf
   build-native:
     runs-on: ubuntu-latest
     env:

Which corresponded to these sorts of configurations:

crates/rapier3d/Cargo.toml:[package.metadata.docs.rs]
crates/rapier3d/Cargo.toml-features = ["parallel", "simd-stable", "serde-serialize", "debug-render"]

@Vrixyz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Vrixyz commented Jul 19, 2024

Seems like there are 3 changes here, so maybe 3 commits are better.

You're definitely right ; we usually squash commits though so in the end it wouldn't matter much, one could argue making different PR for all that would be cleaner, I somewhat agree... but as we have limited bandwidth I believe making more holistic PR are more comprehensive and help communication.

But again, theoretically I agree, and your recent very focused PR are top notch, and much more likely to be merged in a reasonable amount, for someone without merging rights. I'm definitely taking advantage of my "membership" 😅.

@Vrixyz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Vrixyz commented Jul 22, 2024

closed in favor of #697

@Vrixyz Vrixyz closed this Jul 22, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants