Hi Cameleers, I do think that it's not ideal to break the website build, but also I don't think it's avoidable. I don't think it's a big issue if the website fails to build -- I consider the build more as a gating check; and to that end we didn't publish a broken website for the community. And I would much rather have that outcome.
The website is complex, I would argue also that it is rightfully complex because of the breadth of information it provides, and it is not easy for folk that are not intimate with all the technology and how it is setup to judge if a change they make will fail the website build; so let's try to be mindful of that. With that in mind, we should invest (even) more into faster turnaround. So perhaps we should discuss what else we are missing to detect these issues better/easier? I can think of: - further educate folk on the local checks they can run - failed build notification, for which I'm on the hook with the idea of creating GitHub issues on the website repository when the build fails - using the local checks on pull requests in the core/sub-projects Any other ideas? zoran -- Zoran Regvart
