Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 3/29/18 14:43, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> Hm, what's wrong just doing it in the normal build? It's a desired build >>> artifact, so I really don't see any argument for not building it by >>> default? Don't quite see what the advantage of doing it during make >>> check would be?
>> I meant running something that would check that the file compiles, >> without actually producing the output. For the regular docs, there's a >> couple of orders of magnitude of difference in time to do the check vs. >> the actual build. > Or we do both. I'm OK with adding INSTALL to the default build target in doc/src/sgml; the incremental cost isn't large and we now realize there'd be useful error detection. I'm *not* OK with expanding the scope of "make check" to include building the documentation. It's never had anything to do with docs before and I see no reason to start now. Personally, when I'm working on a patch, the doc updates if any are a completely separate matter. I don't want to waste cycles on testing docs when I'm trying to test code, any more than I would like the reverse (ie forcing a docs build to build code too). regards, tom lane