Open Stack

On 09/01/17 17:35 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>On 09/01/17 15:02 +0100, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>>On 2016-12-12 09:22, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>>>On 11/12/16 13:32 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>>>>On 09/12/16 17:20 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>>>>>Greetings,
>>>>>
>>>>>Some docs jobs seem to be broken by the latest (or not?) docutils
>>>>>release. The
>>>>>breakage seems to be related to the latest addition of the bages
>>>>>patch. The docs
>>>>>generation doesn't like to have remote images. It used to be a
>>>>>warning but it
>>>>>seems to have turned into an error now. While this is reported and fixed
>>>>>upstream, we can workaround the issue by tagging the image as remote.
>>>>>
>>>>>An example of this fix can be found here:
>>>>>https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:readme-badge-fix
>>>>>
>>>>>Note that this is mostly relevant for projects that include the
>>>>>readme files in
>>>>>their documentation. If your project doesn't do it, you can ignore
>>>>>this email.
>>>>>That said, I'd recommend all projects to do it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Apparently this "fix" doesn't render the image, which is far from the
>>>>ideal
>>>>solution. Hang on while we find a better fix.
>>>
>>>Ok, here's the actual "fix" for this issue. We're now skipping version
>>>0.13.1 of
>>>docutils as that's breaking several docs dates. if your project is using
>>>the
>>>requirements constraints, you should not be hitting this issue. However,
>>>if your
>>>project isn't using the upper constraints, then you may want to do
>>>something
>>>similar to this[0][1].
>>>
>>>This issue has been reported upstream [2]
>>>
>>>[0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/409630/
>>>[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/409529/
>>>[2] https://sourceforge.net/p/docutils/bugs/301/
>>
>>I see that upstream has closed the issues with "Fixed in Sphinx 1.5.1".
>>
>>Should we update Sphinx to 1.5.1? Anybody wants to go for it? Right now,
>>the global requirements file has:
>>
>>global-requirements.txt:sphinx>=1.2.1,!=1.3b1,<1.4  # BSD
>
>
>Happy to help here,

As promissed, I took at stab at this. I've submitted a patch to update the
sphinx requirement[0] and I've tested this in one of the projects[1].

[0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418772/
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418611/

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 862 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170111/7bf19701/attachment.pgp>