Re: requesting asciidoctor transition needed to update bpo of git
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joseph, that's a very good point! Yes, I agree that the best way
> forward would be to transition git to asciidoctor. eg: if asciidoc
> was backported, and then dropped from unstable (and thus testing) then
> I think an asciidoc~bpo removal request would become a necessary
> hassle. Asciidoctor/1.5.4-2 is available in stretch. Is it new
> enough? In the spirit of quid pro quo, please let me know if there's
> anything I can do to help with the git-el to magit mini-transition :-)
>
> Mert, you're right about minimal requirements. That said, I think the
> data provided by reproducible builds and autopkgtests/DebCI helps
> support the case that the backports repository is a higher quality
> source of updates than other distributions' alternatives. Yes, in
> this case it seems only documentation is affected... ;-) Honestly, I'm
> not looking forward to fixing an unreproducible build in one of my own
> packages (only affects documentation) because it will require adding
> generate-date-stamp-for-a-specific-date functionality to a project that
> is dead upstream.
Hold on, could you tell me which functionality you are looking for
when backporting asciidoc into stable?
If it's just for having the ability to have reproducible builds you
know you already can do that since #656736 which has been merged in
8.6.9-3 right? (stable is already in 8.6.9-5).
You just need to add the "-a footer-style=none" to your asciidoc command.
Patch example: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?att=1;bug=777177;filename=patch.asciidoc.diff.txt;msg=5
That basically removes the date from the footer when generating documentation.
Joseph
Reply to: