[rb-general] Sphinx output always reproducible?

[W. Martin Borgert]

Quoting Chris Lamb <lamby at debian.org>:
> If you meant changing Sphinx to call sorted(..) (I don't think you
> did, as you use "would also", etc. etc.) that could also work.

Yes. I meant not to touch the package code, but change sphinx.

> However, I think it would be superior to use the original ordering
> that exists in the code (see my comments about the Abstract Syntax
> Tree).

Yes, that would be the best solution.
Still, currently the order of sets in docs is arbitrary anyway.
We don't break anything by forcing whatever deterministic order.

> Deterministic doesn't necessarily mean sorted, after all. :)

But the reverse is true. Pardon, True :~)