[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

merging w3c-dtd-xhtml and w3c-sml-lib: ten days to object or find issues

I am just about to upload w3c-sgml-lib that also generates w3c-dtd-xhtml (which will depend on w3c-sgml-lib and consist of links). I have endeavoured to fix all conflicts and ensure that nsgmls, wdg-html-validator, w3c-markup-validator still work. I have to put a caveat on that. As far as I can see wdg-html-validator no longer works at all well. So I mean that my new versions do not make it worse.

That brings me to remind you how we got into this situation. w3c-sgml-lib and w3c-dtd-xhtml essentially do the same job and attempt to provide the same data. I packaged w3c-sgml-lib with that intention and it has a watch file pointing at the w3c website and in principle can be maintained without issues. w3c-dtd-xhtml on the other hand is orphaned, has not been touched in *eight* years and has no clear upstream. Of course I considered taking w3c-dtd-xhtml but its layout is not compatible with the W3C upstream source. It is now history that my first attempt at resolving the conflicts failed. This is my second attempt.

Obviously it follows from this that if the merger goes through without issue I expect to tag all remaining bugs on w3c-dtd-xhtml as "will not fix" and raise wishlist bugs on any packages that depend on w3c-dtd-xhtml to adapt to using w3c-sgml-lib alone. This does not mean I will refuse to fix bugs in w3c-dtd-xhtml but it does mean that if I am going to make the effort you must make the effort of explaining why I should.

If you are happy with the principle of merger but find any issues you can of course raise bugs in the normal way. If these are serious enough they will block these versions going into testing. In principle I have no objection to someone raising a "I am nervous about this." release critical bug to delay entry into testing, so long as:
1.) The bug report makes it clear that this is the nature of the bug.
2.) You provide some objective grounds for your nervousness - i.e. something that could be tested and fixed. 3.) The bug report is clear enough that it can be closed (or perhaps downgraded) in time for me to get vesions 1.3 into testing before the freeze if the concerns are not substantiated.

If you have fundamental objections to the merger then I think it is incumbant on you to: 1.) Explain why two essentially duplicate packages, w3c-dtd-xhtml and w3c-sgml-lib, should exist in Debian indefinitely. 2.) Adopt and fix both w3c-dtd-xhtml and wdg-html-validator and earnestly work with me to resolve any conflicts.

Reply to: