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

Add a GitHub Action to build book? #1458

Closed
Mo-Gul opened this issue Jul 3, 2020 · 5 comments
Closed

Add a GitHub Action to build book? #1458

Mo-Gul opened this issue Jul 3, 2020 · 5 comments

Comments

@Mo-Gul
Copy link

Mo-Gul commented Jul 3, 2020

I am not sure about my request so opinions are welcome.

How about adding a GitHub Action to build the HTML and PDF output on commits which are then somehow/somewhere available to others, so also the (real) results can be checked?

I have no clue if this is possible for AsciiDoctor files and how that would be done. But I know, that this can be done for LaTeX files. A quick search for a starting point on AsciiDoctor Actions revealed

Maybe there is something useful in it.


Background:

In the German book it was found that some figures where not shown in the PDF output (only) (see progit/progit2-de#113) I guess most of the contributors don't have AsciiDoctor installed and "just" use the preview, so not all details like that PDF checking can be done quickly/easily.

@jnavila
Copy link
Member

jnavila commented Jul 3, 2020

This check should be done by asciidoctor itself, and running the compilation on GitHub Actions instead of Travis (presently) will not change anything. Please note that presently, the book is built by travis on all branches and pull requests. This is mainly an issue with asciidoctor which raises no warnings/errors when not processing correctly an image.

@Mo-Gul
Copy link
Author

Mo-Gul commented Jul 3, 2020

Aah, of course the book is build (by Travis). Sorry.
May I ask if the Travis output is available somewhere?

@jnavila
Copy link
Member

jnavila commented Jul 3, 2020

@ben
Copy link
Member

ben commented Jul 3, 2020

Having just gone through this at $DAYJOB, I'd say that it's not difficult to replace Travis with GitHub Actions, but it is tedious, and in the end you have mostly the same thing you had before. We already auto-publish to git-scm.com and the Releases tab, so unless something breaks I don't see a good reason to go through that work.

@Mo-Gul
Copy link
Author

Mo-Gul commented Jul 3, 2020

I already excused myself that I have forgotten that there was the Travis CI. And then of course there is no need to replace it with GitHub Actions.

The missing info was that the builds are auto-published. Thank you guys!!

@Mo-Gul Mo-Gul closed this as completed Jul 3, 2020
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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants