Skip to content

genDocs command not found in Getting Started page #12075

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

Closed
nogurenn opened this issue Apr 13, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #12156
Closed

genDocs command not found in Getting Started page #12075

nogurenn opened this issue Apr 13, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #12156
Assignees

Comments

@nogurenn
Copy link
Contributor

Compiler version

tasty-core / scalaVersion
	3.0.0-RC2
scala3-sbt-bridge / scalaVersion
	3.0.0-RC2
scala3-compiler / scalaVersion
	3.0.0-RC2
scala3-interfaces / scalaVersion
	3.0.0-RC2
scaladoc-nonBootstrapped / scalaVersion
	3.0.0-RC2
scala3-library / scalaVersion
	3.0.0-RC2
scalaVersion
	3.0.0-RC2

Minimized example

sbt genDocs

Output

[error] Not a valid command: genDocs
[error] Not a valid project ID: genDocs
[error] Expected ':'
[error] Not a valid key: genDocs (similar: packageDoc, doc)
[error] genDocs
[error]        ^

Expectation

Successful execution of command.

It may be that the command was replaced with something else, but the Getting Started page (3.0.1-RC1-bin-20210412-69108bf-NIGHTLY) shows sbt genDocs. I can submit a documentation PR if someone can confirm how it works now

@abgruszecki
Copy link
Contributor

@romanowski what SBT task do we use to generate docs?

@romanowski
Copy link
Contributor

romanowski commented Apr 13, 2021

There are 2 ways to generate docs:

  • for any specific module (e.g. scala3-compiler-bootstrapped) with doc task (e.g. scala3-compiler-bootstrapped/doc)
  • combined documentation for scala (content of [dotty.epfl.ch]) with sbt task scaladoc/generateScalaDocumentation or using cmd line script genDocs from project/scripts

@nogurenn
Copy link
Contributor Author

Who do I tag in the PR for review?

@romanowski
Copy link
Contributor

@abgruszecki has reviewed the PR and it looks good (beside one typo).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants