On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:36:09AM -0800, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> Hi Piotr, Kumar and Matthias,
> thanks for all the replies, I'll reply one by one:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Piotr Ożarowski <pi...@debian.org> wrote:
> > [Ondrej Certik, 2009-01-25]
> >> There is a problem with documentation, that it depends on sphinx-0.5,
> >> which is currently only in experimental. And also upstream doesn't
> >> have it in the tarball. I originally fixed that by
> >> adding a new target into debian/rules, that downloaded the upstream
> >> tgz, unpacked, eported the doc/ directory from upstream svn and then
> >> packaged it again. But since it still doesn't build in pure sid, I
> >> rather fixed the build with the current upstream tarball.
> >
> > python-numpy has many reverse dependencies[1] - how about uploading it
> > to experimental for now? This way you'll have Sphinx 0.5.x available.
> I really want it in unstable. It's because the new scipy won't build
> without this upload etc. and many people are just waiting for it. It's
> a legitimate question though, but so far I understood that this is
> what unstable is for. Otherwise people will have to move from unstable
> to experimental to get the latest packages. Is this what we want? I
> prefer it in unstable, but I am open to other opinions.
To me the question is: Why is sphinx 0.5 in experimental not unstable?
This issue does not only affect numpy, as sphinx 0.4.3 has some problems
which prevent successful building of docs (e.g. image/figure handling
bug) -- and at least this one is solved in 0.5.


GPG key:  1024D/3144BE0F Michael Hanke
ICQ: 48230050

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to