On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 08:43:00AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2020/09/06 20:45, Aisha Tammy wrote: > > Hi, > > I've noticed that the sphinx in ports is *really* > > old and hasn't been updated for quite sometime. > > For a long time it had an inactive maintainer listed, which is quite > offputting when updating a port, especially one that is more than just a > quick version bump. > > > I understand that its got a huge amount of reverse dependencies > > and can't just be updated at will, but I was wondering if it might > > be possible to add something like py-sphinx3 which is a different > > package and then is possible start shifting packages? > > > > I am trying to see if I should do this if there's any interest or if > > people would prefer to do it some different way? > > Quite some packages would be upgradable if sphinx is updated. > > > > Best, > > Aisha > > > > It's only ~50 ports. pypy is a bit slow to build, the others are fast > enough. Better to do a standard update if possible, experience shows > that having multiple versions of a popular port is a bit of a pain to > deal with. > > If it turns out there are things which *import* sphinx that need a > python2 version we may need a temporary py2-sphinx port held back at an > older version. But if they only use the command-line tools (sphinx-build > etc) then that's not necessary.
I did some work on sphinx last year which ended up being shelved since I only needed new sphinx to port Simon (simon.kde.org) which didn't work out. My diffs from back then are here: https://stsp.name/simon-port/ One of them updates cmu-sphinxbase to the pre-alpha release 5 which matches what Debian is shipping in -stable. And there are new ports for some components of sphinx that are missing from our ports tree. I won't have time to deal with this myself. But please feel free to use these diffs as a starting point.
