FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-23-2010, 10:00 AM
Stefano Zacchiroli
 
Default Bug#566364: RFH: doc-central

On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 04:12:22PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> doc-central has one release-critical bug, making it unfit for the release. Are
> there volunteers to adopt it? Robert? The QA team? Otherwise, despite it is
> useful, it is maybe time to give up and remove it from our archive...

I find this request of yours unsubstantiated.

The RC bug has a patch pending and is pretty easy to fix. I might
eventually NMU it to fix that, even though I'm not willing to maintain
the package right now. Beside that bug, the package works quite well,
has a respectable number of popcon user (as you observe); I, for
instance, am a daily user of it.

So, exactly *why* you want this package to be removed, considering that
there are way more "bad" packages in the archive (and almost completely
unused) that would deserve removal first?

Cheers.

--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c' ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu tous ceux que j'aime
 
Old 01-23-2010, 10:18 AM
Neil Williams
 
Default Bug#566364: RFH: doc-central

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:00:25 +0100
Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> wrote:

> The RC bug has a patch pending and is pretty easy to fix. I might
> eventually NMU it to fix that, even though I'm not willing to maintain
> the package right now. Beside that bug, the package works quite well,
> has a respectable number of popcon user (as you observe); I, for
> instance, am a daily user of it.

Just out of interest, what's the difference between doc-central and
dwww ?

AFAICT dwww does more via extensions to view the relevant package
details as well as manpages and other content in /usr/share/doc/ that
doesn't need a doc-base file.

I use dwww almost constantly, never considered doc-central. I'm not
saying doc-central should be removed - sounds like it just needs to be
orphaned and put into QA. Just curious.

--


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
 
Old 01-23-2010, 10:50 AM
Stefano Zacchiroli
 
Default Bug#566364: RFH: doc-central

On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 11:18:57AM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> Just out of interest, what's the difference between doc-central and
> dwww ?

That's a pretty damn good question :-)

I've made the choice between dwww and doc-central several years
ago. _IIRC_ , back then dwww was missing decent browsing of the doc-base
sections which is my main access path to documentation; more generally,
I liked dwww more back then. FWIW I've just re-looked at dwww after
your prod, and it seems that it has improved a lot over time.

If the point of yours, beside curiosity, was also to phase out
doc-central in favor of dwww, that might be an option, but then
agreement should be sought between the two packages maintainer and a bit
of smooth upgrade path should be provided.

Cheers.

--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c' ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu tous ceux que j'aime
 
Old 01-23-2010, 11:53 AM
Neil Williams
 
Default Bug#566364: RFH: doc-central

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:50:38 +0100
Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 11:18:57AM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Just out of interest, what's the difference between doc-central and
> > dwww ?
>
> That's a pretty damn good question :-)
>
> I've made the choice between dwww and doc-central several years
> ago. _IIRC_ , back then dwww was missing decent browsing of the doc-base
> sections which is my main access path to documentation; more generally,
> I liked dwww more back then. FWIW I've just re-looked at dwww after
> your prod, and it seems that it has improved a lot over time.

Agreed - and as dwww has progressed, doc-central appears to have
stalled. The Documentation Menu in dwww covers all I need from doc-base
and the addition of man page browsing, info document browsing, viewing
any file in any /use/share/doc/ directory and automatic linking from
changelog.Debian.gz to the BTS and similar - it's all really neat. Add
in the dpkg-www package to link to the Packages / apt cache data and
doc-central could have a lot of catching up to do.

The only thing missing (for me) from dwww is an area covered by devhelp
- and even then a simple symlink is enough to make things like the
gtk2.0 reference manual available in dwww.

devhelp has useful integration with some IDEs so that's why I use that
one as well.

> If the point of yours, beside curiosity, was also to phase out
> doc-central in favor of dwww, that might be an option, but then
> agreement should be sought between the two packages maintainer and a bit
> of smooth upgrade path should be provided.

Any migration would only be due to doc-central becoming orphaned and
then not adopted. doc-central appears to be a native Debian package, so
if it really is abandoned, it is could fall into bit-rot quite
quickly.

There are plenty of situations in Debian where users have a choice of
options that have pros-and-cons. Personally, I don't see a need to
migrate - yet - as long as doc-central is usable and does the smaller
task of just the doc-base files, it is probably worth having both.

If there is any particular content that advises doc-central over dwww
(on www.debian.org or on the Wiki) I'm not aware of it, so it's left to
user choice.

Having dwww just means that should doc-central need to be removed for
problems that arise in the future, we have a easy alternative.

--


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
 
Old 01-23-2010, 03:34 PM
Charles Plessy
 
Default Bug#566364: RFH: doc-central

Le Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 12:00:25PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a crit :
> I find this request of yours unsubstantiated.
>
> The RC bug has a patch pending and is pretty easy to fix. I might
> eventually NMU it to fix that, even though I'm not willing to maintain
> the package right now. Beside that bug, the package works quite well,
> has a respectable number of popcon user (as you observe); I, for
> instance, am a daily user of it.
>
> So, exactly *why* you want this package to be removed, considering that
> there are way more "bad" packages in the archive (and almost completely
> unused) that would deserve removal first?

I am also a happy user of doc-central and I am not saying that it should be
removed by all means. However, if it is de facto abandonned, the Project should
seek for a long term solution since it is a native package (i.e. it has not
upstream apart from Debian itself.)

This package was NMUed in Lenny and needs to be NMUed for Squeeze. If we do not
want to rely on somebody to NMU it in Squeeze+1, I think it needs to be
maintained or removed. I would be most happy if it would be maintained,
therefore I have CCed the person who seems to care most for this package.

If you NMU this package, may I suggest to orphan it and put it in collab-maint?
I offer to do the work if you like the idea (svn or git, just let me know).

Cheers,

--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-23-2010, 04:28 PM
Frank Lin PIAT
 
Default Bug#566364: RFH: doc-central

On Sat, 2010-01-23 at 12:53 +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:50:38 +0100
> Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 11:18:57AM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > Just out of interest, what's the difference between doc-central and
> > > dwww ?
> >
> > That's a pretty damn good question :-)
> >
> > I've made the choice between dwww and doc-central several years
> > ago. _IIRC_ , back then dwww was missing decent browsing of the doc-base
> > sections which is my main access path to documentation; more generally,
> > I liked dwww more back then. FWIW I've just re-looked at dwww after
> > your prod, and it seems that it has improved a lot over time.
>
> Agreed - and as dwww has progressed, doc-central appears to have
> stalled. The Documentation Menu in dwww covers all I need from doc-base
> and the addition of man page browsing, info document browsing, viewing
> any file in any /use/share/doc/ directory and automatic linking from
> changelog.Debian.gz to the BTS and similar - it's all really neat. Add
> in the dpkg-www package to link to the Packages / apt cache data and
> doc-central could have a lot of catching up to do.
>
> The only thing missing (for me) from dwww is an area covered by devhelp
> - and even then a simple symlink is enough to make things like the
> gtk2.0 reference manual available in dwww.
>
> devhelp has useful integration with some IDEs so that's why I use that
> one as well.
>
> > If the point of yours, beside curiosity, was also to phase out
> > doc-central in favor of dwww, that might be an option, but then
> > agreement should be sought between the two packages maintainer and a bit
> > of smooth upgrade path should be provided.
>
> There are plenty of situations in Debian where users have a choice of
> options that have pros-and-cons. Personally, I don't see a need to
> migrate - yet - as long as doc-central is usable and does the smaller
> task of just the doc-base files, it is probably worth having both.

I don't use either. I gave a quick-try to both of them.
If I where to use one of them, I would probably use doc-central, because
it doesn't depends on any indexing tools (dlocate, squish...).

> If there is any particular content that advises doc-central over dwww
> (on www.debian.org or on the Wiki) I'm not aware of it, so it's left to
> user choice.

It's best if packages pros/cons are summarized in package description.

Here's a page for g**glers (contributions are welcome):
http://wiki.debian.org/doc-base

Franklin


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:59 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org