Bug#873456: Bug#876075: Bug#879048: Bug#876075: Anchors are non-unique in the single-HTML version
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 03:01:51PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 01:37:11PM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 25 2017, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not sure where we landed with this, but it feels like the
> > > single-HTML output from Sphnix is kind of broken, and publishing that
> > > on the web site has caused various problems. I'm not sure how to get
> > > to the multi-page version on www.debian.org, and indeed the anchors
> > > and table of contents in Policy are not working right now on the web
> > > site because of this problem.
> > >
> > > I feel like the single-page HTML version may have been a failed
> > > experiment, at least pending further work on Sphinx, and we should
> > > just publish the multi-page version. What do other people think?
> > > (Adding debian-www for their opinion as well.)
> > >
> > > Not having working footnotes feels to me like kind of a showstopper.
> >
> > It's been sixty days since I reported one of these bugs upstream and
> > there has been no response from upstream. So I think it is time to undo
> > our failed experiment.
> >
> > We have a choice between dropping policy-1.html altogether, or instead
> > switching the www.debian.org copy to use the multi-page version and not
> > modifying the debian-policy package.
> >
> > We have three separate bugs (see Cc header) about the singlepage output:
> > the gap in quality between singlepage and multipage is rather wide. So
> > I am favour of dropping policy-1.html altogether. I just don't think
> > it's good enough to include in our package. Further, now that
> > policy.txt.gz has proper section numbering again, it can replace a lot
> > of the uses that there were for policy-1.html.
> >
> > Any objections to dropping singlepage html output completely, until a
> > future date at which Sphinx upstream has improved it?
>
> If you do that, then do not close the bugs related to policy-1.html
> because they will still be valid, and report a bug 'policy-1.html is
> missing'.
Maybe it sound harsher than what I wanted to say.
I have no problem with policy-1.html to be dropped as a stop-gap
measure. However this is not a good long term solution. If sphynx cannot
do it then we should consider a better technology.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: