Re: Package status on www-master (Was: Re: Problem with menu and navbar in French translation of the main page)
Hi,
Alfie, your assumption that www-master runs already Etch is wrong.
I asked the webmasters because I remove a generated SGML (from PO
file) but failed with the same error message during build as in the
past (po4a is too old in Sarge).
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:45:30AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Sorry, misread that as that there might be DDP pages misbuilt. Is
> there a list of required packages? If not, we should definitely start
> it right ahead so we have it documented. If there is it can easily be
> handed along.
>
> I think that should be taken to the debian-doc mailinglist then,
> shouldn't it?
Maybe. At least this list should be informed when the upgrade will happen.
In the past the decision which packages should be installed happened in
private mails and I think this is what Joey prefers for security
reasons. At least I remember that he once sent me a list of installed
packages and asked me to keep it secret.
Also note that the package lists fluctuates. Consider e.g. the current
LaTeX transition (which will affect www-master only once Lenny is
released). CJK (Chinese, Japanese, Korean) support in Woody was far away
from optimal ...
> Did anybody from the according translation/doc team ask the DSAs for
> installation of it? If not, why not?
No, not yet. It is not available in Sarge and currently not required for
build.
> > A proper check for missing packages is probably to force a rebuild of
> > all generated documents.
>
> Personally I'd much appreciate proper documentation of such
> requirements... *sigh*
OK, but there happened also many workarounds. I remember that I asked
webadmins to create a symlink for building Japanese Release Notes (for
Sarge) which is now no longer necessary. Some stuff was built externally
and put in the working copy on www-master (was at least planned for
Vietnamese Release Notes) and some CVS directories where deleted but
the working copy not, ...
Just assuming working Makefiles and doing a delete of the working
copy is not so bad. But I agree that's it's also not required. It could
just help to clean some stuff.
Jens
Reply to: