On 29 Apr 2016, at 19:27, Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Matthieu Moy > <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 11:35:34AM +0200, larsxschneider@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> >>>> +# The follow numbers need to be adjusted when new documentation is added. >>>> +test_file_count html 233 >>>> +test_file_count xml 171 >>>> +test_file_count 1 152 >>> >>> This seems like it will be really flaky and a pain in the future. I'm >>> not really sure what it's accomplishing, either. The earlier steps would >>> complain if something failed to render, wouldn't they? At some point we >>> have to have some faith in "make doc". >> >> I agree. My proposal to check for a handful of generated files was just >> because this extra paranoia was almost free (just 3 lines of code that >> won't need particular maintenance). >> >> In this case, I'm afraid the maintenance cost is much bigger than the >> expected benefits. > > So you proposed to check a handful files for its exact content? > > This could be less of maintenance if we'd check with a "larger as" operator > such as > > test_file_count_more_than html 200 > > using an arbitrary slightly smaller number. Well, I was thinking about testing against something like $(find . -type f -name "git*.txt" | wc -l) but it the end all of this is not really meaningful I think... - Lars > > >> >> -- >> Matthieu Moy >> http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html