Re: jquery.js from Doxygen in documentation, what to do about it
Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> writes:
> On 11/24/2012 01:54 AM, Gert Wollny wrote:
>> Now I've seen that Doxgen has the jquery-1.3.2.js file in the debian/
>> directory and in fact with this script the pages display correctly. My
>> question is now, should I also include this source file in the source
>> distribution, or would it suffice to document that the source code to
>> the copressed files can be found with the according doxygen version?
> In Debian, you should always be able to build from source. So if you
> could use the original source code, and delete the binary file (eg: the
> minimized jscript) that would be the best option.
Sadly, that's not really helpful advice for Gert, since his package just
has Doxygen-generated documentation. The jquery code is coming from
Doxygen. So from his perspective, he *is* building from source, but
Doxygen, when building the documentation from comments, is including a
Javascript library that Lintian is complaining about.
> P.S: The above isn't an approval for embedding yet another version of
> jquery in your package, I think it should be avoided as well if
> possible. Probably one of the options is to patch upstream source code
> so that it can work with the target Debian package and still render
> well. I have no idea how practical that would be though.
This would be something that would need to be done in the doxygen package,
not in Gert's package.
For right now, I think the best thing for the Doxygen *clients* to do is
just ignore this issue. It may need a bug against doxygen, though (and
possibly some help for the Doxygen maintainer).
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: