From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] travis-ci: build documentation Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:32:54 -0400 Message-ID: <20160429143254.GA27249@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1461922534-49293-1-git-send-email-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160429121429.GB27952@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Matthieu Moy , git@vger.kernel.org, stefan.naewe@atlas-elektronik.com, gitster@pobox.com To: Lars Schneider X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Apr 29 16:33:02 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aw9Ta-000147-ED for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 16:33:02 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753321AbcD2Oc6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:32:58 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:59131 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752950AbcD2Oc6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:32:58 -0400 Received: (qmail 9612 invoked by uid 102); 29 Apr 2016 14:32:57 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:32:57 -0400 Received: (qmail 22264 invoked by uid 107); 29 Apr 2016 14:32:59 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:32:59 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:32:54 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 04:22:05PM +0200, Lars Schneider 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 > [...] > I agree, too. I wasn't sure about this check. That's why I added > the little comment above to point out the problem. > > Should I reroll? IMHO, yes. -Peff