David Bremner writes:
> It seems our previous attempt with order-only targets was not
> sufficient to avoid problems with sphinx-builds doctree cache [0].
> Looking around at other people's approaches [1], using seperate
> doctrees was suggested. I guess there might be a slight loss of
>
On Fri, May 31 2019, David Bremner wrote:
> It seems our previous attempt with order-only targets was not
> sufficient to avoid problems with sphinx-builds doctree cache [0].
> Looking around at other people's approaches [1], using seperate
probably good, but you may want to s/seperate/separate/
It seems our previous attempt with order-only targets was not
sufficient to avoid problems with sphinx-builds doctree cache [0].
Looking around at other people's approaches [1], using seperate
doctrees was suggested. I guess there might be a slight loss of
efficiency, but it seems more robust.
