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

[Amos Atoza]

I want to join illuminati

On 09/09/2013, Michael Bayer <mike_mp at zzzcomputing.com> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>