On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 09:01:16AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > The Debian project still needs to keep its promise that the recipient can > modify any part of the package at the source level, and build it from the > modified source using only Debian.
Fair enough. > That means the recipient of Debian must be able to build the documentation > from the reST files. And that means Debian needs to include the > dependencies for building the documentation, including required Docutils > extensions <URL:http://bugs.debian.org/559916>. > > So my advice to anyone who wants to work toward getting ‘bugs-everywhere’ > to enter Debian again is to work with the packagers of its build > dependencies, including getting Bug#559916 fixed. Unfortunately, #559916 has been open for almost three years now. There has even been an apparently ready-to-merge package since June (although the mentors link is out of date, the source is available [1]). I don't know what to do to push that forward (if anyone reading this knows what I can do, let me know. I'd be glad to help). What I *can* do is work on the BE side of things. My views on possible workarounds haven't changed much since the last time we discussed this: 1. Package BE without the docs (à la SciPy [2]) 2. Add a new build target to make the user-facing docs (doc/*.txt, which don't use numpydoc) without pulling in the API docs (doc/libbe/*, which does use numpydoc-style docstrings). Debian can package just the user-facing docs. 3. Build the docs without numpydoc A long time ago (on the BE list) you said: On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 05:19:42PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > "W. Trevor King" <wk...@drexel.edu> writes: > > All the user-directed stuff is fine. Some of the API documentation > > isn't quite as nice. > > You're right. I had assumed the dependency on the ‘numpydoc’ extension > was strict, but I'd be happy with those results. > > When I try today, though, I get this error: > > [snip error due to older Sphinx] Now that more modern versions of Sphinx have had time to percolate into Debian, would you care to revisit this? Cheers, Trevor [1]: http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/python-modules/packages/numpydoc/trunk/debian/ [2]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=600547 -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
