Make it loose coupling between RubyGems and RDoc #1171

mterada1228 · 2024-09-05T23:42:20Z

Problems

There are following problems because of tight coupling between RubyGems and RDoc.

If there are braking changes in RDoc, RubyGems is also broken.
When we maintain RDoc, we have to change RubyGems.

The reason why they are happened is that RubyGems creates documents about a gem with installing it.

Note that RubyGems uses functions of RDoc to create documents. Specifically,

Creating documents is executed by rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb.
::RDoc::RubygemsHook which is defined by RDoc is called by the file.

Solution

RubyGems has the plugin system.

If a gem includes rubygems_plugin.rb, RubyGems loads it. RubyGems executes a process defined in it while installing gems, uninstalling gems or other events.

We can use the system to solve the problems.

The root cause is RubyGems directly references the class of RDoc.

We can remove the root cause by making RDoc RubyGems plugin.

Alternatively rubygems_plugin.rb creates documents about gems.

FAQ

Q1. Do we need to change codes of RubyGems?

A.

No, we don't.

This change keeps compatibility of API used from RubyGems.

Q2. Is it better to delete existing codes related to RDoc in RubyGems?

No, it isn't.

If we change codes of RubyGems,
we can't keep a compatibility.

Example:

If we delete codes that uses RDoc::RubygemsHook in rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb, documentations are not created with old RDoc.

Q3. When can we delete rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb?

A.

We can delete it when all users use RDoc including rubygems_plugin.

Default gems and old RDoc just don't use rubygems_plugins.
So, When following conditions are completed, we can delete rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb.

Old Rdoc versions that don't have this change will be EOL.
RDoc will be a bundled gem (not a default gem). (cf: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20309)

Q4. Is it a breaking change that Rubygems creates documents with rubygems_plugin not RDoc::RubygemsHook?

A.

No, it isn't.

If we simply implement this approach,
we move the implementation from rdoc/lib/rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb to rubygems_plugin.rb.

This way can be breaking change.

It seems to be fine that we just need to delete rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb but it doesn't work. It generates multiple documents.

rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb has the following code.

begin
  require "rdoc/rubygems_hook"
  # ...
rescue LoadError
end

This code ignores RDoc related processes when rdoc/rubygems_hook can't be required. But, this 'require' is not failed.

This is because Ruby installs Rdoc as a default gem.

So, Rdoc installed as a default gem generates documents and one installed as a normal gem does it too.

If you think that this behavior is accectable,
we can just delete rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb.

What do you think about this approach?

In this change, we take another approach to solve the problem that creates multiple documents.

If Gem.done_installing(&Gem::RDoc.method(:generation_hook)) in rubygems/rdoc.rb doesn't create documents, we can solve the problem.

We have some options.

We change rubygems/rdoc.rb and then don't execute Gem.done_installing. (This is a change on RubyGems.)
We change rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb and then make generation_hook a method that create documents when there is not rubygems_plugin.rb. (This is a change on RDoc.)

We choose the latter to avoid changing on RubyGems.

Test

Preparation

Install Rdoc which including our changes by executing rake install.

❯ rake install

We confirmed that Rdoc which including our changes was installed.

❯ gem list | grep rdoc
rdoc (6.6.0, default: 6.4.0)

Check point

We tested to check compatibility.

How to chack the compatibility?

We tested creating same documents by our RDoc and old RDoc with latest RubyGems.

We used following versions to test.

❯ ruby -v
ruby 3.1.0p0 (2021-12-25 revision fb4df44d16) [arm64-darwin22]

❯ gem list | grep rdoc
rdoc (default: 6.4.0)

❯ ruby -I rubygems/lib rubygems/exe/gem --version
3.5.14

Here is a result of test with old RDoc.
We can see that the document is created correctlly with Parsing... and Done installing....

❯ ruby -I rubygems/lib rubygems/exe/gem install pkg-config
Successfully installed pkg-config-1.5.6
Parsing documentation for pkg-config-1.5.6
Done installing documentation for pkg-config after 0 seconds
1 gem installed

Here is a result of test with our RDoc.
We can see that the document is created correctlly with Parsing... and Done installing....

❯ ruby -I rubygems/lib rubygems/exe/gem install pkg-config
Successfully installed pkg-config-1.5.6
Parsing documentation for pkg-config-1.5.6
Done installing documentation for pkg-config after 0 seconds
1 gem installed

As you can see we got the same results, our RDoc keeps compatibility.

Test for RDoc as default gem

Setup

# For backup
❯ mv $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc_bkup
❯ mv $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc.rb $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc.rb.bkup

# Copy sources to directory of default gems
❯ cp -r ./lib/rdoc $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc
❯ cp -r ./lib/rdoc.rb $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc.rb

# Check
❯ gem list | grep rdoc
rdoc (default: 6.6.3.1)

Result

❯ gem install pkg-config
Successfully installed pkg-config-1.5.7
Parsing documentation for pkg-config-1.5.7
Done installing documentation for pkg-config after 0 seconds
1 gem installed

lib/rubygems_plugin.rb

kou · 2024-09-11T03:22:17Z

FYI: RubyGems wants to remove RDoc integration code if possible:

st0012 · 2024-09-12T11:11:45Z

Thank you @mterada1228 @kou. My current understanding is: this PR will allow RubyGems to remove RDoc specific code, because RDoc will start using RubyGems plugin (its official API) to generate documentation for gems. Is this correct?

mterada1228 · 2024-09-12T23:11:10Z

Thank you @mterada1228 @kou. My current understanding is: this PR will allow RubyGems to remove RDoc specific code, because RDoc will start using RubyGems plugin (its official API) to generate documentation for gems. Is this correct?

@st0012 Cc: @kou

Yes, it is. Your understanding is correct.

kou · 2024-09-13T01:19:31Z

Correct as @mterada1228 said.

Note:
But we can't remove the RDoc integration code from RubyGems immediately as the PR description mentioned. Because:

We can't use the RubyGems plugin feature for a default gem
RDoc that doesn't have this RubyGems plugin support exist

RDoc will be a bundled gem (not a default gem) since Ruby 3.5: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20309
We can remove the RDoc integration code from RubyGems when Ruby 3.4 reaches EOL.
We can assume that all maintained RDocs are installed as a normal gem and they have this RubyGems plugin support at the time.

deivid-rodriguez · 2024-09-27T14:50:20Z

Hello! From RubyGems maintainers team perspective, I think this is a nice thought out PR, and I'm very happy it will allow us to eventually remove RDoc code from RubyGems ❤️. Thank you!

kou · 2024-10-17T01:08:14Z

Are there people who want to review this PR?
If nobody wants to this, I'll merge this in this month. (I'll review this again before I merge this.)

hsbt · 2024-10-18T07:08:46Z

I'm +1 to this change. But I have some concerns. Is this working with fresh installation of ruby package?

In my understanding, the current rubygems plugin system could work with GEM_HOME/plugins/rubygems-generate_index_plugin.rb and GEM_HOME/plugins/rubygems-generate_index-1.1.3/lib/rubygems_plugin.rb with latest rubygems.

How generate GEM_HOME/plugins/rdoc_plugin.rb with fresh installation of Ruby 3.4?

kou · 2024-10-18T07:31:29Z

Does "fresh installation" mean that RDoc is installed as a default gem?
This solution (plugin based RDoc generation) isn't used for the case. RDoc hook in RubyGems is used. It's the current approach.
This solution is only used when RDoc is installed as a bundled gem or a normal gem.

hsbt · 2024-10-18T07:46:04Z

Does "fresh installation" mean that RDoc is installed as a default gem?

Yes.

This solution is only used when RDoc is installed as a bundled gem or a normal gem.

I see. Thanks. We make document generation is disabled with "RDoc is installed as a default gem" case like Ruby 3.4?

kou · 2024-10-18T07:59:13Z

We make document generation is disabled with "RDoc is installed as a default gem" case like Ruby 3.4?

Does this mean the following?

If we ship this change in Ruby 3.4, whether gem install XXX generates documentation of XXX or not?

The answer is that gem install XXX still generates documentation of XXX. This doesn't change the current behavior. In the case, https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/blob/465bfaf530c6712487495419e8ce9f5a0a0385e9/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb#L11 generates documentation of XXX. (This solution isn't used.)

hsbt · 2024-10-18T08:07:33Z

The answer is that gem install XXX still generates documentation of XXX.

Really? https://github.com/ruby/rdoc/pull/1171/files#diff-57670ce1156b5670b904c97f8a01d658a0b5a458ffe71f2fcc7a7eefd4254d2cR15 seems empty.

Could you explain how work lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb and this change without plugin installation?

kou · 2024-10-18T08:08:25Z

Ah, wait. It may not work.
@mterada1228 Did we check the case?

deivid-rodriguez · 2024-10-21T12:41:38Z

@hsbt raised a good point. I think ruby-core default gem installer may need to make sure to generate plugins for default gems too, because as of now, no default gem includes rubygems plugins and I believe the mechanism is not going to work by default.

mterada1228 · 2024-10-25T07:10:01Z

@hsbt, @kou

I checked the behavior in the following case.
#1171 (comment)

When RDoc includes this changes was used as default gem,
documents weren't created as you say.

How to check

Copy codes from this directory to the directory of default gems library.

❯ mv $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc_bkup # for backup
❯ cp -r ./lib/rdoc $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc

Execute gem install.

❯ gem install foo
Fetching foo.gem
Successfully installed foo
1 gem installed

Documents was not created.

Solutions

One solution is that If RDoc::RubygemsHook can find rubygems_plugin.rb RDoc creates documents by rubygems plugins, otherwise RDoc does so by current process.
Another solution is that I wait for Ruby 3.5 will make RDoc from default gems to bundled gems.

Although It is possible that I make default gems able to handle rubygems plugins, this approach is maybe too much.

kou · 2024-10-26T22:31:09Z

Thanks for checking the case that RDoc is installed as a default gem.
It didn't work...

I agree that merging this after Ruby 3.4 is an option. We'll migrate RDoc to a bundled gem from a default gem for Ruby 3.5: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20309
If RDoc is installed as a bundled gem, we don't need to care about the default gem case.

For merging this before Ruby 3.4, mterada1228#1 may work. (Sorry. I didn't test it yet. It's a concept implementation.)
The followings are important parts:

https://github.com/mterada1228/rdoc/pull/1/files#diff-57670ce1156b5670b904c97f8a01d658a0b5a458ffe71f2fcc7a7eefd4254d2cR275-R277
- Detect whether this RDoc is installed as a default gem or not. We can use lib/rubygems_plugin.rb to detect it.
https://github.com/mterada1228/rdoc/pull/1/files#diff-57670ce1156b5670b904c97f8a01d658a0b5a458ffe71f2fcc7a7eefd4254d2cR283-R298
- Do nothing if RDoc is a normal gem or a bundled gem
- Generate/remove if RDoc is a default gem as usual

It's not complex. If this works well, this approach may be an option.
@mterada1228 Do you want to check whether this approach work with the following cases?

RDoc is installed as a normal gem: We did the check when we created this PR
RDoc is installed as a default gem: We did the check in Make it loose coupling between RubyGems and RDoc #1171 (comment)

mterada1228 · 2024-10-31T23:11:51Z

@kou

Thank you for your PR.
I think that solution is so nice.

I want to try whether it may work or not, but the branch have to merge some fix in the master branch to try it.
Can you merge the branch of add-rubygems-hook ?

kou · 2024-11-01T22:45:23Z

@mterada1228 You want to try mterada1228#1 on https://github.com/ruby/rdoc/tree/master , right?
If mterada1228#1 doesn't work as expected, we need to revert the change from https://github.com/ruby/rdoc/tree/master . So can we avoid the approach?

Can we try mterada1228#1 without merging it to https://github.com/ruby/rdoc/tree/master ?
It seems that you merged the current master to https://github.com/mterada1228/rdoc/tree/add-rubygems-hook . So I rebased mterada1228#1 on the current https://github.com/mterada1228/rdoc/tree/add-rubygems-hook .
Can we try mterada1228#1 by the following now?

$ git close https://github.com/kou/rdoc.git rdoc.kou
$ cd rdoc.kou
$ git switch add-rubygems-hook-default-gem
$ ...

mterada1228 · 2024-11-01T23:43:47Z

@kou

Sorry, My explanation was so bad...
What I wanted is same as one you say.

Thank you for your operation.
I'll test mterada1228#1 later.

mterada1228 · 2024-11-07T23:26:52Z

@hsbt @kou

I merged @kou's proposal mterada1228#1.
So, in case RDoc is installed as default gem, documents can be created.

Test

1. RDoc is installed as normal gem.

Setup

❯ rake install
rdoc 6.7.0 built to pkg/rdoc-6.7.0.gem.
rdoc (6.7.0) installed.

❯ gem list | grep rdoc
rdoc (6.7.0, default: 6.6.3.1)

Execution

❯ gem install pkg-config
Fetching pkg-config-1.5.7.gem
Successfully installed pkg-config-1.5.7
Parsing documentation for pkg-config-1.5.7
Installing ri documentation for pkg-config-1.5.7
Done installing documentation for pkg-config after 0 seconds
1 gem installed

2. RDoc is installed as default gem

Setup

# For backup
❯ mv $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc_bkup
❯ mv $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc.rb $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc.rb.bkup

# Copy sources to directory of default gems
❯ cp -r ./lib/rdoc $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc
❯ cp -r ./lib/rdoc.rb $(ruby -e 'print Gem::RUBYGEMS_DIR')/rdoc.rb

# Check
❯ gem list | grep rdoc
rdoc (default: 6.6.3.1)

Execution

❯ gem install pkg-config
Successfully installed pkg-config-1.5.7
Parsing documentation for pkg-config-1.5.7
Done installing documentation for pkg-config after 0 seconds
1 gem installed

test/rdoc/test_rdoc_rubygems_hook.rb

lib/rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb

kou · 2024-11-10T21:55:10Z

This is ready again.

This should be worked when RDoc is installed as a default gem too. In the case, the existing integration logic in RubyGems (not RubyGems plugin logic) is used.

Are there any other concerns?

st0012 · 2024-11-13T16:53:52Z

lib/rubygems_plugin.rb

+# If generate and remove are executed at that time, an error will occur.
+# So, we can't register generate and remove to Gem at that time.
+begin
+  require_relative 'rdoc/markdown'


rdoc/rd/block_parser and rdoc/rd/inline_parser have similar problems to markdown too.

Right.
We can use one of rdoc/markdown, rdoc/rd/block_parser or rdoc/rd/inline_parser here.
This just wants to fix a bootstrap problem.

We want to run bundle install when we start developing cloned ruby/rdoc.
In the time, this lib/rubygems_plugin.rb is used. But RDoc isn't ready yet because rdoc/markdown.rb and so on aren't generated yet. So bundle install is failed.

This disables this lib/rubygems_plugin.rb only when the initial bundle install to fix the bootstrap problem.

st0012 · 2024-11-13T16:59:27Z

lib/rubygems_plugin.rb

+# To install dependency libraries of RDoc, you need to run bundle install.
+# At that time, rdoc/markdown is not generated.
+# If generate and remove are executed at that time, an error will occur.
+# So, we can't register generate and remove to Gem at that time.


I don't quite understand what this comment intends to express. Do you mind elaborate it a bit more?

st0012 · 2024-11-13T17:00:30Z

lib/rubygems_plugin.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+# frozen_string_literal: true


Can we add comments to explain when and by what this file will be used?

I added comment.
Can you check that?

st0012 · 2024-11-13T17:01:29Z

@mterada1228 can you also update the description to reflect the latest changes? Thanks 😄

mterada1228 · 2024-11-15T00:18:54Z

@st0012

@mterada1228 can you also update the description to reflect the latest changes? Thanks 😄

Thank you for your comment.

I changed a description of this PR.
Following points are summary of changes.

1
Q3. When can we delete rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb?
-> I added a condition.

RDoc will be a bundled gem (not a default gem). (cf: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20309)

2
Q4. Is it a breaking change that Rubygems creates documents with rubygems_plugin not RDoc::RubygemsHook?
-> I changed description about the approach we took.

We change rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb and then make generation_hook a method that create documents when there is not rubygems_plugin.rb. (This is a change on RDoc.)

3
I added a chapter of Test for RDoc as default gem.

\### Problems There are following problems because of tight coupling between RubyGems and RDoc. 1. If there are braking changes in RDoc, RubyGems is also broken. 2. When we maintain RDoc, we have to change RubyGems. The reason why they are happened is that RubyGems creates documents about a gem with installing it. Note that RubyGems uses functions of RDoc to create documents. Specifically, - Creating documents is executed by `rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb`. - `::RDoc::RubygemsHook` which is defined by RDoc is called by the file. \### Solution RubyGems has the plugin system. If a gem includes `rubygems_plugin.rb`, RubyGems loads it. RubyGems executes a process defined in it while installing gems, uninstalling gems or other events. We can use the system to solve the problems. The root cause is RubyGems directly references the class of RDoc. We can remove the root cause by making RDoc RubyGems plugin. Alternatively `rubygems_plugin.rb` creates documents about gems. \### FAQ Q1. Do we need to change codes of RubyGems? A. No, we don't. This change keeps compatibility of API used from RubyGems. Q2. Is it better to delete existing codes related to RDoc in RubyGems? No, it isn't. If we change codes of RubyGems, we can't keep a compatibility. Example: If we delete codes that uses `RDoc::RubygemsHook` in `rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb`, documentations are not created with old RDoc. Q3. When can we delete `rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb`? A. We can delete it when all users use RDoc including `rubygems_plugin`. Next ruby version is 3.4. If it includes the RDoc including `rubygems_plugin`, we can delete `rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb` after ruby 3.3 is EOL. Q4. Is it a breaking change that Rubygems creates documents with rubygems_plugin not RDoc::RubygemsHook? A. No, it isn't. If we simply implement this approach, we move the implementation from `rdoc/lib/rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb` to `rubygems_plugin.rb`. This way can be breaking change. It seems to be fine that we just need to delete `rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb` but it doesn't work. It generates multiple documents. `rubygems/lib/rubygems/rdoc.rb` has the following code. ``` begin require "rdoc/rubygems_hook" # ... rescue LoadError end ``` This code ignores RDoc related processes when `rdoc/rubygems_hook` can't be required. But, this 'require' is not failed. This is because Ruby installs Rdoc as a default gem. So, Rdoc installed as a default gem generates documents and one installed as a normal gem does it too. If you think that this behavior is accectable, we can just delete `rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb`. What do you think about this approach? In this change, we take another approach to solve the problem that creates multiple documents. If `Gem.done_installing(&Gem::RDoc.method(:generation_hook))` in `rubygems/rdoc.rb` doesn't create documents, we can solve the problem. We have some options. * We change `rubygems/rdoc.rb` and then don't execute `Gem.done_installing`. (This is a change for RubyGems.) * We change `rdoc/rubygems_hook.rb` and then make `generation_hook` a no-op method. (This is a change for RDoc.) We choose the latter to avoid changing for RubyGems. \### Test \#### Preparation Install Rdoc which including our changes by executing `rake install`. ❯ rake install We confirmed that Rdoc which including our changes was installed. ❯ gem list | grep rdoc rdoc (6.6.0, default: 6.4.0) \#### Check point We tested to check compatibility. How to chack the compatibility? We tested creating same documents by our RDoc and old RDoc with latest RubyGems. We used following versions to test. ``` ❯ ruby -v ruby 3.1.0p0 (2021-12-25 revision fb4df44d16) [arm64-darwin22] ❯ gem list | grep rdoc rdoc (default: 6.4.0) ❯ ruby -I rubygems/lib rubygems/exe/gem --version 3.5.14 ``` Here is a result of test with old RDoc. We can see that the document is created correctlly with `Parsing...` and `Done installing...`. ``` ❯ ruby -I rubygems/lib rubygems/exe/gem install pkg-config Successfully installed pkg-config-1.5.6 Parsing documentation for pkg-config-1.5.6 Done installing documentation for pkg-config after 0 seconds 1 gem installed ``` Here is a result of test with our RDoc. We can see that the document is created correctlly with `Parsing...` and `Done installing...`. ``` ❯ ruby -I rubygems/lib rubygems/exe/gem install pkg-config Successfully installed pkg-config-1.5.6 Parsing documentation for pkg-config-1.5.6 Done installing documentation for pkg-config after 0 seconds 1 gem installed ``` As you can see we got the same results, our RDoc keeps compatibility.

This reverts commit 70a144b.

…is skipped.

Co-authored-by: mterada1228 <49284339+mterada1228@users.noreply.github.com>

hsbt

@mterada1228 /cc @kou

Sorry to late response. I confirmed #1171 (comment).

We should ship RDoc 6.9.0 and merge this feature to Ruby 3.4.0.

hsbt · 2024-12-13T05:35:46Z

@st0012 @mterada1228 If you found another issue about this PR, we can fix this in the future like RDoc 6.9.1 and Ruby 3.4.1.

mterada1228 commented Sep 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

lib/rubygems_plugin.rb Show resolved Hide resolved

mterada1228 marked this pull request as draft September 5, 2024 23:52

mterada1228 marked this pull request as ready for review September 7, 2024 05:49

kou mentioned this pull request Sep 11, 2024

Load plugin immediately rubygems/rubygems#6673

Merged

4 tasks

colby-swandale self-requested a review October 17, 2024 01:27

st0012 added this to the v6.8.0 milestone Oct 17, 2024

kou reviewed Nov 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

mterada1228 force-pushed the add-rubygems-hook branch from 56651c0 to 535c5e3 Compare November 9, 2024 02:52

st0012 modified the milestones: v6.8.0, v7.0.0 Nov 12, 2024

st0012 reviewed Nov 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

mterada1228 force-pushed the add-rubygems-hook branch from 4954e4f to 42b86d1 Compare November 14, 2024 00:17

mterada1228 and others added 14 commits December 13, 2024 14:25

rename a test file

2942f0d

Revert "rename a test file"

80840fd

This reverts commit 70a144b.

revert a test class name

6957bae

exclude TestRDocRubyGemsHook at job of ruby-core

ae5618a

When rubygems_plugin.rb is not found, test_rdoc_rubygems_hook.rb …

f9a5cd3

…is skipped.

remove unnecessary whitespace

7f023ee

add comment

0eeffde

Add support for the case that RDoc is installed as a default gem

22a8cbd

Fix problems

539d862

Co-authored-by: mterada1228 <49284339+mterada1228@users.noreply.github.com>

Simplify

d490fd2

removed unused blank lines and revert test

bf15f65

for rerun tests

314e75b

add comment for rubygems_plugin.rb

638a71a

hsbt force-pushed the add-rubygems-hook branch from 42b86d1 to 638a71a Compare December 13, 2024 05:26

hsbt approved these changes Dec 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

hsbt merged commit f4e10f4 into ruby:master Dec 13, 2024
22 checks passed

This was referenced Dec 13, 2024

Fixed compatibility error with setup command and RDoc plugin on RubyGems ruby/ruby#12330

Merged

Support new rdoc plugin rubygems/rubygems#8322

Merged

st0012 mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2024

gem rdoc gem_name fails with undefined method 'force=' for an instance of RDoc::RubygemsHook #1243

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Make it loose coupling between RubyGems and RDoc #1171

Make it loose coupling between RubyGems and RDoc #1171

mterada1228 commented Sep 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kou commented Sep 11, 2024

st0012 commented Sep 12, 2024

mterada1228 commented Sep 12, 2024

kou commented Sep 13, 2024

deivid-rodriguez commented Sep 27, 2024

kou commented Oct 17, 2024

hsbt commented Oct 18, 2024

kou commented Oct 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

hsbt commented Oct 18, 2024

kou commented Oct 18, 2024

hsbt commented Oct 18, 2024

kou commented Oct 18, 2024

deivid-rodriguez commented Oct 21, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mterada1228 commented Oct 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kou commented Oct 26, 2024

mterada1228 commented Oct 31, 2024

kou commented Nov 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mterada1228 commented Nov 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mterada1228 commented Nov 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kou commented Nov 10, 2024

st0012 Nov 13, 2024

kou Nov 14, 2024

st0012 Nov 13, 2024

st0012 Nov 13, 2024

mterada1228 Nov 14, 2024

st0012 commented Nov 13, 2024

mterada1228 commented Nov 15, 2024

hsbt left a comment

hsbt commented Dec 13, 2024

Make it loose coupling between RubyGems and RDoc #1171

Make it loose coupling between RubyGems and RDoc #1171

Conversation

mterada1228 commented Sep 5, 2024 • edited Loading

Problems

Solution

FAQ

Test

Preparation

Check point

Test for RDoc as default gem

Setup

Result

kou commented Sep 11, 2024

st0012 commented Sep 12, 2024

mterada1228 commented Sep 12, 2024

kou commented Sep 13, 2024

deivid-rodriguez commented Sep 27, 2024

kou commented Oct 17, 2024

hsbt commented Oct 18, 2024

kou commented Oct 18, 2024 • edited Loading

hsbt commented Oct 18, 2024

kou commented Oct 18, 2024

hsbt commented Oct 18, 2024

kou commented Oct 18, 2024

deivid-rodriguez commented Oct 21, 2024 • edited Loading

mterada1228 commented Oct 25, 2024 • edited Loading

How to check

Solutions

kou commented Oct 26, 2024

mterada1228 commented Oct 31, 2024

kou commented Nov 1, 2024 • edited Loading

mterada1228 commented Nov 1, 2024 • edited Loading

mterada1228 commented Nov 7, 2024 • edited Loading

Test

1. RDoc is installed as normal gem.

Setup

Execution

2. RDoc is installed as default gem

Setup

Execution

kou commented Nov 10, 2024

st0012 Nov 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kou Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

st0012 Nov 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

st0012 Nov 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mterada1228 Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

st0012 commented Nov 13, 2024

mterada1228 commented Nov 15, 2024

hsbt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hsbt commented Dec 13, 2024

mterada1228 commented Sep 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kou commented Oct 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

deivid-rodriguez commented Oct 21, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mterada1228 commented Oct 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kou commented Nov 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mterada1228 commented Nov 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mterada1228 commented Nov 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading