[Openstack-devel] python-dogpile.core_0.4.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Michael Bayer]

On Sep 9, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote:

> On 09/09/2013 09:55 PM, Michael Bayer wrote:
>> Hi Thomas -
>> 
>> the .js files are part of the Sphinx documentation build.  My Python
>> dist files include the Sphinx docs built out, the .js files are copied
>> by Sphinx to be part of the docs
> 
> If Sphinx is adding them at build time, why don't you remove it from
> your archive, and let Sphinx build it?

the .js files are not in my source repository.   I build them at dist time before producing the .tar.gz file.  I'll look to them today regarding this issue.


> 
>> and I have done so for years, in all
>> my projects including SQLAlchemy, Mako, Alembic, Dogpile Core, Dogpile
>> Cache - SQLAlchemy is certainly present in many linux distros.
> 
> Unfortunately, FTP Masters will not accept this as argumentation.

I'm not making any argument here.  I'm just wondering what has suddenly changed.

> 
> Also, I had a look, and there's no .js in the source package of Alembic
> in Debian.

the same .js files (though they appear to be different versions) are in the .tar.gz distro:

classics-MacBook-Pro:alembic-0.6.0 classic$ find . -name *.js
./docs/_static/doctools.js
./docs/_static/jquery.js
./docs/_static/searchtools.js
./docs/_static/underscore.js
./docs/_static/websupport.js
./docs/searchindex.js

Also, all the files except "searchindex.js" do have copyright info at the top, are we talking about copyright notice or compression ?    searchindex.js is actually a datafile for searching the documentation. How are "source" and "data" files distinguished?    

Basically, if Sphinx is outputting .js files that are not OSS compatible, I think that's a bug in Sphinx.  I'd like to report it to them.

> 
> 
>> Perhaps build maintainers for Linux modify the build to not include
>> the sphinx docs?  not sure.   You can create a buildfile by checking
>> out the appropriate source tag and saying "python setup.py dist",
>> the sphinx docs aren't built automatically so they'd be omitted.
> 
> Well, best would be if you could remove the embedded javascript
> libraries, and let sphinx-build do its work at build time.

As I said, there are no .js libraries in my source repository (except for in SQLAlchemy where there are special things going on with the docs).    Python packages don't have a "build" that includes the assembly of documentation, so I build these before producing the .tar.gz.    


> Do you think
> that's possible? Otherwise, that's added work for the downstream
> distributions, which I'm not sure every package maintainer will be
> willing to do (I would simply remove the docs, and write about it in a
> README.Debian so that our users know where to download it).

there is clearly a solution where the .js files can be present, I'd just like to identify what has changed.   If it's just that the Debian maintainers have been removing them by hand previously, or they are just doing "python setup.py sdist" from my build tag, then we'd be looking for an improvement to the process here.

But what I need to know is the exact issue with the .js files and which files specifically, preferably some verbiage I can point the Sphinx maintainers towards.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/openstack-devel/attachments/20130909/9aa1953b/attachment.sig>