Don't execute scaladoc for `publishLocal`

steps

publishLocal always runs Scaladoc. I cannot think of any case where this is useful, I’m open to ideas.

problem

1. Slows down publishLocal. 1.1. Relevant for sbt plugins. 1.2. Relevant for source dependencies (where jars are used for dependencies). 1.3. Relevant for any user that wants to test jars locally (pretty common in enterprises).

expectation

publishLocal does not execute Scaladoc.

Is this a welcome contribution?

[ches]

It should be treated as the name suggest, a publishing step, so I think it makes sense to keep Scaladoc in there. The reason you might want to publish things locally could be for rehearsal of actual publishing

I can agree with this, for a piece of anecdata, today I had publishing fail for one cross version of one module in a build, because scaladoc caused scalac to fail (not just a bad link, a more fun scala.reflect.internal.FatalError: bad constant pool tag, but I digress—the details are not relevant here).

Is that a common enough case to block a default of a common workflow? Maybe not. Would I have a publishLocal step in a CI environment just to fail and prevent incomplete remote publishing in a case like this? I wouldn’t have considered it before, but now I actually might, unless sbt someday supports atomic multi-module publishing when aggregating.

So none of this is to say that there would be no value in a form of “light mode” or intuitive setting like skipDoc in publishLocal, but I do like the confidence that comes with publishLocal and publishM2 staying close to “full fidelity” by default.

[mkurz]

Setting

publishArtifact in (Compile, packageDoc) := false

will also prevent docs from being published when using publish. This is maybe not what you want (?)