Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Migrate provider-specific executor docs to providers - #34809
Conversation
RNHTTR
commented
Oct 6, 2023
It's currently unclear why I'm able to reference I'd appreciate if any reStructuredTexperts™️ / Sphinx experts know how to link from the |
eladkal
commented
Oct 7, 2023
If not mistaken we have example in Notifer doc that links core to provider docs |
Yeah, I see lots of references from
|
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
potiuk
commented
Oct 16, 2023
yes. Sphinx is picky and requires sometimes a lot of persistence and trying out things looking at other examples. |
eladkal
commented
Oct 17, 2023
Seems there are conflicts |
eladkal
commented
Oct 17, 2023
We need also to edit docs/apache-airflow/redirects.txt This will allow referencing from old paths to the new paths without getting 404 page |
52188f2 to
5217a26CompareRNHTTR
commented
Oct 21, 2023
Is this just a flaky test? It builds fine locally |
potiuk
commented
Oct 21, 2023
Likely one more fix to recently completed |
#35102 should fix it |
5217a26 to
414735aComparepotiuk
commented
Oct 21, 2023
Rebased. Let's see if the fix works. |
RNHTTR
commented
Oct 21, 2023
Thanks. What's the best way for me to retry the failed test? |
eladkal
commented
Oct 21, 2023
Just did. Lets see |
414735a to
743d2c7CompareI've added |
RNHTTR
commented
Oct 22, 2023
Strange... This builds successfully, but if I remove |
potiuk
commented
Oct 22, 2023
You can use |
potiuk
commented
Oct 22, 2023
Guessing what could happen here (and those are just guesses looking at the output) I think the problem is that you have changes in both "airflow" and "celery" and other packages that refer to each other in both directions. The way how docs building is done is that it builds each package separately and uses the "inventory" from other packages (downloaded from s3) it refers in order to verify if the document exist. Once the package successfully builds the docs, the downloaded inventory gets updated locally. In most cases where there are two packages and only one of them refer to the other document, this document building has multi-pass implemented. If the package fails to be built it is added to the queue and retried again (up to three times in case the dependencies are A -> B -> C (so if A links to B and B links to C in the first pass C succeeds, in the second B will succeed as it will use locally built inventory from C and in the third A will finaly succeed using the locally built inventory from B. The problem is that if those packages are build together and they are referring to each other's new documents - none of them can succed - because they are referring to each other's documents, and those documents do not exist in the remote inventory. Looking at the output - it almost worked: You can see that at first pass airflow + cncf.kubernetes + celery + dask failed docs building At the second pass the three others succeeded, only airflow was left. Unfortunately the third pass on Airflow failed. The error you see: Is that API documents could not be found in Airflow - most likely because the "clean" step deleted it and for some reason they were not recreated by the API plugin. So maybe we can attempt to remove the clean step between the retries. Suggestion how to fix it (if my guess is right): Only clean the docs when you start and not when you retry. Might be a good exercise to learn how the build process works. As i understand it (again by looking at the code - I modified it quite a few times but mostly when I saw similar issues): In build_docs.py : The
That could probably solve the problem. |
743d2c7 to
d8d8e96CompareRNHTTR
commented
Oct 23, 2023
That explains why a build would succeed after a handful of failure messages :) Thanks, @potiuk . I added a param to not perform the clean step if it's on a retried build. Still getting empty spell check errors that I need to investigate. |
potiuk
commented
Oct 23, 2023
Yep. Looks better. I think those are not spellcheck errors but some regular sphinx riddiles. Sphinx does not seem to like SOMETHING in the docs and not tell exactly where. The usual thing which hopefully when we move to #33156 might get better. For now it requires a bit guessing what's wrong, unfortunately. |
potiuk
commented
Oct 23, 2023
My wild guess is that you have label reference somewhere in the code left (of the form |
RNHTTR
commented
Oct 23, 2023
Locally, I get the following I'll keep digging. |
potiuk
commented
Oct 23, 2023
Sphinxes often speak in riddles, this is something I often repeat (too often I am afraid) |
potiuk
commented
Nov 15, 2023
Ho about completing it :)? |
RNHTTR
commented
Nov 16, 2023
Been traveling / busy / sick the last few weeks. Hoping to pick this back up next week. |
RNHTTR
commented
Dec 9, 2023
@lzdanski This is the spell check sphinx issue I was referring to. |
potiuk
commented
Dec 10, 2023
d8d8e96 to
cfbd26aCompareeladkal
commented
Jan 15, 2024
@RNHTTR can you rebase and resolve conflicts? I see the current failure is on openai provider which is odd. |
cfbd26a to
0546c48Comparepotiuk
commented
Jan 23, 2024
Fix to failing release Helm job - #36985 |
potiuk
commented
Jan 24, 2024
Just to comment on the errors @RNHTTR and guide you a bit.. I think all the _api errors are coming from those first few errors here. Usually they appear when the main package failed to build even after multiple attempts. They are really side-effects of the reall problems: Error 1) in openai -> seems that there is extra file added You should track the others :) |
RNHTTR
commented
Feb 26, 2024
Can focus on this again -- will mark ready for review when tests are passing |
RNHTTR
commented
Feb 26, 2024
Closing this in favor of #37728 |


Closes: #33916