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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

epubcheck 5.1.0 does not recognize --failonwarnings+, nor --failonwarnings- #1575

Closed
lemniscati opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1591
Closed

epubcheck 5.1.0 does not recognize --failonwarnings+, nor --failonwarnings- #1575

lemniscati opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1591
Assignees
@rdeltour
Labels
status: has PR The issue is being processed in a pull request type: improvement The issue suggests an improvement of an existing feature
Milestone
Next maintenance ...

Comments

@lemniscati
Copy link

According to the help message, both --failonwarnings+ and --failonwarnings- should be valid.
But epubcheck 5.1.0 says about them, respectively:

Unrecognized argument: "--failonwarnings+"
EPUBCheck v5.1.0
...

and

Unrecognized argument: "--failonwarnings-"
EPUBCheck v5.1.0
...

respectively.
naglis added a commit to naglis/epubcheck that referenced this issue Nov 28, 2024
@naglis
fix: recognize --failonwarnings+ and --failonwarnings-
d76632a 
Fixes w3c#1575
@naglis naglis mentioned this issue Nov 28, 2024
Closed
@rdeltour rdeltour added this to the Next maintenance release milestone Dec 26, 2024
@rdeltour
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the report!

As said in #1576:

I'm not sure for how long we've had this option and it's been documented this way, but I agree that having both --failonwarnings+ and --failonwarnings- looks a bit odd.

I'm in favor of keeping the current CLI behavior (a single --failonwarnings switch). I'll publish a PR to simplify the code a bit and fix the documentation.

@rdeltour rdeltour added type: improvement The issue suggests an improvement of an existing feature status: in progress The issue is being implemented by the development team labels Dec 28, 2024
@rdeltour rdeltour self-assigned this Dec 28, 2024
@rdeltour rdeltour mentioned this issue Dec 28, 2024
Merged
@rdeltour rdeltour added status: has PR The issue is being processed in a pull request and removed status: in progress The issue is being implemented by the development team labels Dec 28, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@rdeltour rdeltour

Labels
status: has PR The issue is being processed in a pull request type: improvement The issue suggests an improvement of an existing feature
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Next maintenance release
2 participants
@rdeltour @lemniscati