Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Cross referencing broken #51

Closed
dirk-thomas opened this issue Oct 2, 2014 · 7 comments
Closed

Cross referencing broken #51

dirk-thomas opened this issue Oct 2, 2014 · 7 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member

Some cross references work correctly, e.g.: http://docs.ros.org/indigo/api/roscpp/html/classros_1_1XMLRPCCallWrapper.html

XmlRpc::XmlRpcServerMethod in the inheritance diagram links to the correct page in a different package.

But some others are broken, e.g.: http://docs.ros.org/indigo/api/rosbag/html/c++/player_8h.html

rosbag/macros.h in the include dependency graph links to the wrong URL.

I suspect the problem to be related to the fact that the second case uses c++ subfolders for the docs (since these packages also generate Python docs). Based on that assumption it seems to be a very big problem for the ROS documentation.

@tfoote
Copy link
Member

tfoote commented Oct 2, 2014

This looks like the metadata which is inaccurate: https://github.com/ros-infrastructure/rosdoc_tag_index/blob/master/indigo/tags/ros-indigo-rosbag#L1

@dirk-thomas dirk-thomas self-assigned this Oct 2, 2014
@dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member Author

Since jenkins_scripts generated the tag file for the rosdoc_tag_index repo it needs to add additional information about the generator specific subfolders: ros-infrastructure/jenkins_scripts@3fe2390

It uses the newly introduce API in rosdoc_lite to query that information: e328c80 (also needs 4f98045)

Based on these additional information rosdoc_lite can generate the correct relative link: 34b448d

  • using the generator specific subfolder of the source package to get as many levels up as necessary to point to its own html folder
  • using the generator specific subfolder of the destination package to point to the potential subfolder of the html folder

This addressed most of the wrong cross-references.
But some are still invalid on http://docs.ros.org/indigo/api/rosbag/html/c++/player_8h.html:

  • the link in the line #include "rosbag/macros.h"
  • the furthest left node labeled rosbag/macros.h in the graph

@trainman419
Copy link

It looks like the invalid links to "rosbag/macros.h" is pointing to the correct package now (rosbag_storage), but it still isn't honoring the subfolder config in that pacakge.

@tfoote
Copy link
Member

tfoote commented Oct 2, 2014

There's also an issue with having three copies of rosbag/macro.h of which the left most is broken, and the right two have correct links, but incorrectly say rosbag/macro.h they should be cpp_common/macros.h or rospack/macros.h

@dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member Author

jenkins_scripts generates generic tag files for all packages of the processed repo (instead of using the existing once or the ones being generated during this job). This has been worked around in ros-infrastructure/jenkins_scripts@de30936

With this the links finally look good.

The label on some nodes in the graph is still showing the wrong namespace (while pointing to the correct location).

@dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member Author

I don't know what in our infrastructure / configuration might be responsible for the wrong labels in the graph (especially since all links point to the correct location now. Anyone having an idea on this otherwise I might call it a dixygen problem and close the ticket since the actual links are all fixed now?

@tfoote
Copy link
Member

tfoote commented Oct 3, 2014

Looks good, it's working and I don't see red flags for future issues. I've opened #52 for the graph box labels separately.

@tfoote tfoote closed this as completed Oct 3, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants