> > could you add that to the README
Hm, I'd like to, but ...... any clue how to escape the ` character in MarkDown? * process a single AsciiDoc file: `docs/preprocessor/preprocess-file.sh `pwd `/gremlin-console/target/apache-gremlin-console-*-standalone `pwd`/docs/src/ *xyz*.asciidoc` A simple backslash doesn't seem to work (tried in http://markdownlivepreview.com/). Cheers, Daniel On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:18 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > that's a helpful command, daniel - could you add that to the README when > you get a chance (and any other related options that might be helpful)? > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Daniel Kuppitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi David, > > > > bin/process-docs.sh will process *all* *.asciidoc files. That includes 1 > or > > 2 files with Hadoop code samples, hence Hadoop must be running. > > To avoid those checks and process only a single file, you can use this > > command: > > > > docs/preprocessor/preprocess-file.sh > > `pwd`/gremlin-console/target/apache-gremlin-console-*-standalone > > `pwd`/docs/src/*xyz*.asciidoc > > > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 10:33 PM, David Robinson <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I am working off of the latest "master" and wanted to add a few changes > > to > > > the "Has Step" documentation in the the-traversal.asciidoc file. > > > > > > Following the README.asciidoc, it says this: > > > * Build AsciiDocs: `bin/process-docs.sh` > > > > > > The process-docs.sh and related sh files around this were just updated > in > > > the past few hours and now require Hadoop to be running to rebuild the > > > ascii docs ? > > > > > > Is it really true that to make a minor typo fix or an update to a > > > non-hadoop specific step, that we now need to have Hadoop running on > our > > > development machine ? Or is there a new way to generate the documents > > that > > > I am not aware of ? > > > > > > This is the message I see when running process-docs.sh: > > > >> Hadoop is not running, be sure to start it before processing the > docs. > > > > > > If the new process really does require Hadoop, may I request that we > not > > do > > > this or find a way to split up the traversal document so that > non-Hadoop > > > related updates don't require Hadoop to be running ? > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > >
