Skip to content

Add and propagate quiet arg to build_site() #2899

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

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jun 5, 2025
Merged

Add and propagate quiet arg to build_site() #2899

merged 9 commits into from
Jun 5, 2025

Conversation

jayhesselberth
Copy link
Collaborator

@jayhesselberth jayhesselberth commented Jun 3, 2025

Closes #2330

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 3, 2025

@jayhesselberth

This comment was marked as outdated.

@jayhesselberth

This comment was marked as outdated.

@ethanbass

This comment was marked as outdated.

@ethanbass

This comment was marked as outdated.

@jayhesselberth

This comment was marked as outdated.

@jayhesselberth
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jayhesselberth commented Jun 4, 2025

There's also expect_snapshot(variant = ...) but that seems like even more work for this one test.

A simpler test would be to check for "pandoc" or "chunk" in the message output, which I don't think we'd ever see unless the rmarkdown build output was included (by quiet = FALSE).

@ethanbass
Copy link

For what it's worth, from my point of view I think that testing for some key phrases like "pandoc" and/or "chunk" seems like a reasonable approach for testing whether the quiet is being passed through correctly to the build functions.

@jayhesselberth jayhesselberth merged commit 824ab4a into main Jun 5, 2025
17 checks passed
@jayhesselberth jayhesselberth deleted the quiet-arg branch June 5, 2025 00:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

No quiet arg for build_site
2 participants