Upgrade yard to 0.9.12, motivated by CVE.

[xaviershay]

No description provided.

[xaviershay]

I don't know WTF is going on with the build but I don't think it's green on master.

[pirj]

Rebased on master and changed the version to the latest 0.9.12 -> 0.9.20.

[pirj]

Doc diff is 2k+ lines, needs to be closely looked at.

[JonRowe]

😬 Can you push the diff up to a branch on rspec/rspec.github.io ?

[pirj]

@JonRowe Pushed here.

[JonRowe]

@pirj there is a task in the rspec-dev repo for creating docs, if you use that the diff size will reduce as a lot of lines will be incorrectly linking to assets

We might need to work on that further to streamline the changes / cleanup the files I'm seeing random ws changes we probably don't need.

[pirj]

There might be some difference due to:

[error]: Error loading plugin 'yard-rspec-docs-template'

I'll get back to this a bit later.

[JonRowe]

Heh, that might not be relevant :)

[pirj]

@JonRowe Here it is.

[benoittgt]

I think we can now jump to 0.9.22 :)

[JonRowe]

Same problem as before though

[benoittgt]

So the issue is that the diff is too big?

I ran the command bundle exec rake update_docs from rspec-dev but the diff is way too big. 🧐
https://github.com/rspec/rspec.github.io/compare/re-enable-yard-check?expand=1

I didn't specify release tag in rake command argument, but even without release tags I think I miss something.

Also I may have found a way to get rid of this error #1938 (comment) by installing the gem from rspec.github.io gem build then gem install. But I am not sure.

[JonRowe]

The diffs are large because they're html and the format will have changed, whats unfortunately needed is to check that our docs are still valid, its probably easier to compare the rendered result than the diff itself...

[benoittgt]

I opened a draft PR with the changes. rspec/rspec.github.io#131

As I mentioned in the draft PR. I am wondering if this PR should go to maintenance branch instead of master if we regenerate the documentation.

[JonRowe]

For rspec-rails it will need to go to 3-9-maintenance for sure.

[benoittgt]

Closed by #2285