Re: Advice on HTML docs
Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org> writes:
> These were fixed and I uploaded a new upstream version provided by the
> maintainer but it was rejected because there is no source for the HTML
> documentation.
> "
> rejected, the source of doc/*.html is missing. If you look into the
> files you see a "Generator" Metatag pointing at GuideML. According
> to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GuideML) thats a
> meta-language used to generate files out of it.
> "
> The history is this: The HTML docs were (once upon a time) created using
> an Amiga application before the port to Ubuntu/Debian. Upstream now
> maintain the docs using text editors rather than automated tools -
> upstream just haven't removed the generator meta tags. The maintainer
> put a note to this effect in README.Debian prior to the rejection.
I think the only problem may be that the note isn't in the place they
looked. I have a package with a similar problem (openafs-doc) and it was
approved, but I put the note to that effect in debian/copyright, which is
the file that the ftp-masters review for these sorts of issues and which
is the place to note the provenance and licensing of the source.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: