[Pkg-crosswire-devel] BT docs, help and manpages

[Dmitrijs Ledkovs]

2009/2/1 Jonathan Marsden <jmarsden at fastmail.fm>:
> Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>
>>> OK; we're on the same page on this one, good.  Are there any BibleTime
>>> developers and/or Crosswire people here who would be either happy or
>>> unhappy if we split the documentation out into a separate binary package
>>> (which could be arch-independent of course, so avoiding this lintian
>>> complaint)?
>
>> Knowing how "kind" upstream is I would split everything in
>> /usr/share/ into one bibletime-common or bibletime-data. Cause I
>> don't think we are at the point of splitting it further per language
>> cause I don't (yet) want to maintain each language and figure out how
>> to make apt download the correct language package.
>
> Sounds reasonable, but see below about Help usage.  I suppose we could
> do a Depends: bibletime-common in the bibletime binary package?
>
> BTW, Jordan Mantha (aka LaserJock) is probably our guy for how to do
> per-language stuff like that, I'm pretty sure he said he'd done it for
> his distribution already.  But that is a luxury which can wait.
>
>> BTW I did this for gnomesword (I should push changes for a review).
>
> Sure.  Except that it is now Xiphos (I'm waiting to see how some
> non-Greek-speakers will mis-pronounce that name...) :)
>
> I did notice that BT seems to be using these documentation trees in its
> Help menu, so we need to check that if you install it without them, you
> don't get nasty error messages when you try and use Help :)
>
> [Aside... I just noticed that right now BT's help wants to browse these
> documents under /usr/local/share/bibletime/docs ... which happens to
> work here, only because I did a manual install of BT earlier, but we
> can't package it that way!  /usr/local is out of bounds for packaged
> software... ]
>

I am sure that a small prefix in the rules will put it in the right place

>>> One thought: has anyone tried building and running this version of
>>> BibleTime against the current libsword6 packages??  If that combination
>>> works, then we could get BT updated in Debian (experimental) even before
>>> we have libsword7 in a suitably finished state for upload.
>
>> Well that would be cool =D I'm still working on libsword7. I'm playing with
>> symbols files so far they are misbehaving. But I should sort it out
>> soon.
>
> OK.  What exactly is going wrong with that?  Do you have an example of
> what breaks?

I don't know =D  I've branched off and started from scratch. Waiting
for launchpad
build results since it's the AMD64 that misbehaves =D

>
>> Then the only thing left would be manpages.
>
> Manpages for Bibletime:  I see no lintian warnings about man pages at
> all.  Am I missing something?

That was about libsword.

>
> Manpages for bibledit: I just grabbed the new manpages from their git
> (Teus is doing a lot to help us get this packaged!), editing them
> minimally, and added them my new branch at
> lp:~pkgcrosswire/bibledit/manpages -- and then proposed that for merge
> and put you as the reviewer :)
>
> Manpages for libsword7: This is a different kind of issue -- do we need
> one manpage for each documented library API function?  We didn't have
> them for libsword6, but that was a different era and maybe the rules are
> tighter now than they used to be about that?
>

There are ~2000 symbols exported by the library =D No debian doesn't
force you to do that. There are a few executables that libsword is building
installmgr, cacheing-indexing thing and a few converters. They need manpages.

> Jonathan
>

PS. I think there is a difference when my emails arrive via
1) My gmail --> you
2) My comments on launchpad --> launchpad --> you
3) My gmail --> Alioth mailing list --> you

And possibly 1 and 3 again but from Thunderbird/Gmail.

-- 
With best regards


Ледков Дмитрий Юрьевич