Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-07-31 Thread Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 14:05:41 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:07:59PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > > On Thursday 18 July 2013 14:45:38 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > - Option 3: > > > > > > (Note: I'm assuming you are generatin

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-07-23 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:07:59PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > On Thursday 18 July 2013 14:45:38 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > [snip] > > - Option 3: > > > > (Note: I'm assuming you are generating API docs directly fromt the > > source files. So the input for the doc buil

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-07-20 Thread Joachim Breitner
Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 18.07.2013, 14:45 +0200 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow: > On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 11:35:46PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer > wrote: > > - Using the full source tarball. Saddly this means having to compile most > > of > > it in order to get the tools for buildi

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-07-18 Thread Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
On Thursday 18 July 2013 14:45:38 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: [snip] > - Option 3: > > (Note: I'm assuming you are generating API docs directly fromt the > source files. So the input for the doc building is not seperable from > the actual source.) > > For packages 1 and 2 build without docs but

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-07-18 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 11:35:46PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > Hi everyone. First of all, I'm cross-posting this between legal and devel > because I really don't know to which of them belongs (or maybe it does in > both). > > The issue is this: Qt 5 has grown so large (8

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-08 Thread Joerg Jaspert
On 13235 March 1977, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > As a possible workaround, upstream has suggested to provide the documentation > already generated (could be for the submodules and/or the full doc, this has > not been discussed yet). My first reaction has been to think that this

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-07 Thread Don Armstrong
On Thu, 06 Jun 2013, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > Building the full doc could be done in two ways: > > - Using the full source tarball. Saddly this means having to compile most of > it in order to get the tools for building the doc, or hacking far too much > the > build system t

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-07 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Jun 07, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > - We do have the source code for generating it (preferred form of > modification). > > - We can build it, but it requires lot of work... and avoid FTBFSs while > bootstrapping ;) > > So, could we accept pre-generated documentation in thi

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-07 Thread Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
On Friday 07 June 2013 08:31:22 Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: > Le 7 juin 2013 05:18, "Paul Wise" a écrit : > > I would suggest the approach taken by the recent GSoC projects related > > to bootstrapping new ports. Multi-stage builds. First stage without > > docs and second stage with docs. Only the se

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-07 Thread Charles Plessy
[Dropping debian-legal as it is not a legal issue.] Le Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 07:40:35AM +0200, olivier sallou a écrit : > > Though packager should at least build the doc himself, locally to be sure > doc can indeed be generated. Hello everybody, how about implementing this verification with auto

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-06 Thread Bastien ROUCARIES
Le 7 juin 2013 05:18, "Paul Wise" a écrit : > > I would suggest the approach taken by the recent GSoC projects related > to bootstrapping new ports. Multi-stage builds. First stage without > docs and second stage with docs. Only the second stage gets uploaded > to Debian. > > http://wiki.debian.or

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-06 Thread olivier sallou
2013/6/7 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer > Hi everyone. First of all, I'm cross-posting this between legal and devel > because I really don't know to which of them belongs (or maybe it does in > both). > > The issue is this: Qt 5 has grown so large (850+MB unpacked in the single- > source tar

Re: On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-06 Thread Paul Wise
I would suggest the approach taken by the recent GSoC projects related to bootstrapping new ports. Multi-stage builds. First stage without docs and second stage with docs. Only the second stage gets uploaded to Debian. http://wiki.debian.org/DebianBootstrap -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/P

On accepting pre-generated doc from upstream

2013-06-06 Thread Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
Hi everyone. First of all, I'm cross-posting this between legal and devel because I really don't know to which of them belongs (or maybe it does in both). The issue is this: Qt 5 has grown so large (850+MB unpacked in the single- source tarball, will continue growing) that upstream also provides