Devon Carew

One option - if we do want to continue to support some pre-2.17 sdks for a while - is to change the behavior of `--packages` to fast fail when run...

@bwilkerson, who has knowledge of the Fuchsia / GN resolution scheme. For dartdoc to work for Fuchsia, I imagine it'll need to understand that resolution scheme.

Thanks for the report!

From a discussion, if we choose to rev. this to 1.0.0, doing this before package:checks is released would cause less work for the community (after that release, people will need...

> Do we need to roll this unreleased version into google3? I've only rolled in published or about-to-be-published versions into google3 in the past. For most packages, we like to...

> Right, and that's the model we've been following when we can Ah, great; I wasn't aware. > but the third party packages are going to block that for `2.0.0`....

Perhaps we could run them as separate steps in a build? Or have some other way to group the output to help call out which steps failed.

Something like: I'd have to look at how the health.yml file is set up - it might surface as having individual steps in a `steps:` section? It would probably mean...

Thanks for the contribution! I think that we want to clear out the unpublished changes first; https://github.com/google/vector_math.dart/pull/344. And, I may re-run our API tool to see what if any deps...

Here's the link to the failure (which may not live too long): https://ci.chromium.org/ui/p/dart/builders/try/pkg-linux-release-try/91534/overview After you rev the dartdoc dep and rebuild the sdk, you want to run: `./out/ReleaseX64/dart-sdk/bin/dart doc --sdk-docs...