where to maintain DEP8^W autopkgtest spec now
Le Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 09:57:34PM +0200, Bill Allombert a ?crit :
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 04:20:38PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 11:52:14PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > It took me a bit longer than that (sorry about that), but you can now
> > > find attached to this mail my first attempt at adding the autopkgtest
> > > spec to the Debian Policy package.
> >
> > Friendly ping to the -policy folks. Had anyone a chance to look at my
> > patch and see if I should change anything to match your expectations?
> >
> > For now the only pending change I've accumulated is the one mentioned by
> > Martin, about removing the section "Implicit test control file for known
> > package types". If that's the only change missing, I'll be happy to send
> > you a final version of the patch. If not ... I'm all ears :-)
>
> Lintian report some issues:
>
> W: debian-policy: doc-base-abstract-might-contain-extra-leading-whitespace autopkgtest:5
> E: debian-policy: doc-base-file-references-missing-file autopkgtest:9 /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/package-tests.txt.gz
> E: debian-policy: doc-base-file-references-missing-file autopkgtest:12 /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/package-tests.html
> E: debian-policy: doc-base-file-references-missing-file autopkgtest:13 /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/package-tests.html
>
> Also, would you mind if I converted autopkgtest.md to DebianDoc-SGML ?
> I am concerned to have to deal with different quoting rules in different
> files.
Hi Bill and everybody,
I recommend to avoid DebianDoc-SGML: in my understanding its current
maintainer, Osamu Aoki, would like to retire it eventually and has been
advocating conversion of DebianDoc-SGML to DocBook XML.
Actually, the conversion of the policy document itself has been in the
air for some time, see for instance #661417.
Have a nice day,
Charles
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: