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

Don't require numfig to use :numref: on sections #4444

Closed

Conversation

mwoehlke
Copy link
Contributor

Tweak logic that rejects a :numref: if numfig is not on to bypass this check if the reference is a section. Section numbers are applied independent of numfig, so the check is not needed, and makes it needlessly difficult to use :numref: if the user only cares about using it on sections.

Tweak logic that rejects a :numref: if numfig is not on to bypass this
check if the reference is a section. Section numbers are applied
independent of numfig, so the check is not needed, and makes it
needlessly difficult to use :numref: if the user only cares about using
it on sections.
@tk0miya
Copy link
Member

tk0miya commented Jan 17, 2018

Thanks, but it seems testing are failed.
Please check it. You can run it with tox command on your local.

@tk0miya tk0miya added domains:std type:proposal a feature suggestion labels Jan 17, 2018
@tk0miya tk0miya added this to the 1.8 milestone Jan 17, 2018
@tk0miya tk0miya modified the milestones: 1.8, 1.7.1 Feb 12, 2018
@tk0miya tk0miya added type:bug and removed type:proposal a feature suggestion labels Feb 12, 2018
Copy link
Member

@tk0miya tk0miya left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, but it seems tests were failed. Could you check them please?
And, could you rebase this into 1.7 branch? Then I will merge this soon.

@tk0miya tk0miya modified the milestones: 1.7.1, 1.7.2 Feb 23, 2018
tk0miya added a commit to tk0miya/sphinx that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2018
@tk0miya tk0miya mentioned this pull request Mar 7, 2018
@tk0miya
Copy link
Member

tk0miya commented Mar 8, 2018

I updated testcases and merged this as #4719.
Thank you for contribution

@tk0miya tk0miya closed this Mar 8, 2018
@mwoehlke-kitware
Copy link

Oh, good; thanks! I tried running the tests, but it was not at all obvious how to dig any details out of the massive pile of output...

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 3, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants