Re: Side effect of dropping python2 with -doc packages
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 11:05:33AM -0700, Joseph Herlant wrote: > > Yes, this is the third email on this in the last month, previous two > > didn't get any replies. > > Sorry I didn't mean to anger you or be disrespectful in any way. My > apologies if I did. I wasn't angered, the second of those was mine and I didn't notice the first one. > I was off the list for a bit (because I unsubscribed from all of them > for personal reasons) and didn't find what I was looking for while > searching in the archive. > > > I don't think 12.3 mentions source packages or describes what to do when > > there are multiple main subpackages. > > That's what I wanted to clarify as there are mention of "package" and > "binary package" I wanted to make sure that package (as not "binary > package") was referring to source package. I don't think it means the source package, and several things there suggest it's a binary one. This includes the file path clause itself, as "/usr/share/doc/package" definitely means using the binary package name. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Side effect of dropping python2 with -doc packages
Hi Andrey, Thanks for your reply. On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 10:40 AM Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > Yes, this is the third email on this in the last month, previous two > didn't get any replies. Sorry I didn't mean to anger you or be disrespectful in any way. My apologies if I did. I was off the list for a bit (because I unsubscribed from all of them for personal reasons) and didn't find what I was looking for while searching in the archive. > I don't think 12.3 mentions source packages or describes what to do when > there are multiple main subpackages. That's what I wanted to clarify as there are mention of "package" and "binary package" I wanted to make sure that package (as not "binary package") was referring to source package. > > I see several possibilities on how to handle that: > > * leave it as is and it's fine (but doesn't match Policy 12.3) > > * overwrite dh_installdocs to pass --doc-main-package > > * rename the -docs package to match -doc and have the > > ftp-master rm the old one > > * have dh_installdocs translate python into python3 package names > > when looking for the main package > Note that there are two questions here, about the package name and about > the file path. For the first question the answer is in > https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2019/07/msg00080.html: "Please keep > the python-foo-doc package. Do not rename it to python3-foo-doc. If > python-foo was providing documentation: move it to python3-foo or create > python-foo-doc (not python3-foo-doc!) binary package." Thanks for pointing out this one, I missed it during my research, > For the second question, I'm keeping the things as is if the docs are > installed into /python-foo-doc/ and change /python-foo/ to /python3-foo/ > otherwise. I'm not bumping the compat level so no /python-foo-doc/ to > /python-foo/ changes occur. Thanks for the explanation. Have a nice day, Joseph
Re: Side effect of dropping python2 with -doc packages
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 10:16:28AM -0700, Joseph Herlant wrote: > While tidying up some packages before taking some time off I realized > that some packages like django-tables had binary packages that took > the convention of creating -doc packages using -doc (a > very long time ago). > > The result was the location of the doc changed from > /usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2-doc to > /usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2 with the bump to compat 11. > > But now that we dropped the python2 binary package we end up with the > "main package" not being detected anymore and the doc moved back to > /usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2-doc. Yes, this is the third email on this in the last month, previous two didn't get any replies. > The way I read the policy, it seems the -doc package should be package name>-doc. Am I correct to read it this way? I don't think 12.3 mentions source packages or describes what to do when there are multiple main subpackages. > I see several possibilities on how to handle that: > * leave it as is and it's fine (but doesn't match Policy 12.3) > * overwrite dh_installdocs to pass --doc-main-package > * rename the -docs package to match -doc and have the > ftp-master rm the old one > * have dh_installdocs translate python into python3 package names > when looking for the main package Note that there are two questions here, about the package name and about the file path. For the first question the answer is in https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2019/07/msg00080.html: "Please keep the python-foo-doc package. Do not rename it to python3-foo-doc. If python-foo was providing documentation: move it to python3-foo or create python-foo-doc (not python3-foo-doc!) binary package." For the second question, I'm keeping the things as is if the docs are installed into /python-foo-doc/ and change /python-foo/ to /python3-foo/ otherwise. I'm not bumping the compat level so no /python-foo-doc/ to /python-foo/ changes occur. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Side effect of dropping python2 with -doc packages
Hi guys, While tidying up some packages before taking some time off I realized that some packages like django-tables had binary packages that took the convention of creating -doc packages using -doc (a very long time ago). The result was the location of the doc changed from /usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2-doc to /usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2 with the bump to compat 11. But now that we dropped the python2 binary package we end up with the "main package" not being detected anymore and the doc moved back to /usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2-doc. The way I read the policy, it seems the -doc package should be -doc. Am I correct to read it this way? (it's not specified that it's binary but not source package either so I just want to make sure I get it right) I see several possibilities on how to handle that: * leave it as is and it's fine (but doesn't match Policy 12.3) * overwrite dh_installdocs to pass --doc-main-package * rename the -docs package to match -doc and have the ftp-master rm the old one * have dh_installdocs translate python into python3 package names when looking for the main package Which one do you think would be preferable? (I know there are multiple python package in this case so it would be interesting to have a consensus on how to handle it) Other preferable solutions? Thanks for your help, Joseph
