W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > February 2003

Re: [check] 0.6.2 release (Was Re: inaccuracies in validator)

From: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
Date: 24 Feb 2003 20:51:50 +0200
To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Cc: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>, Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch>
Message-Id: <1046112710.1283.152.camel@bobcat.ods.org>

On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 05:02, Terje Bless wrote:

> Hmmm. I'm not really sure we can avoid that since RPM wants tokens -- e.g.
> %{_sysconfdir} -- in there and we want real paths.

I'm actually pretty sure that we shouldn't even try to avoid that
stuff.  I'm perfectly fine with it, but hey, you asked to see the
patches :)

>  I'm not sure there is
> any problem with v.w3.org not using the config file from CVS, but it should
> be usable for CVS/tarball users without pre-processing with RPM.

Agreed, but there's simply no way to make it so that it pleases everyone
out-of-the-box...

> The DEBUG option has been disabled in CVS

Thanks for the heads up, that makes the perl hunk one line smaller :)

> Ok, header.html now includes it in the initial <h1> on every page
> (including Validator output).

Sounds good.

> >Apart from a couple of trivial documentation updates (checklink needs
> >Config::General), nothing here that should absolutely go into 0.6.2.

Oops, I was wrong about that, I already documented it some time ago. 
The only thing left on my list is to update misc/w3c-validator.spec with
some educated guesses about the tarball locations and stuff.  I'm also
going to rename the package to w3c-markup-validator for consistency with
the product name and Frederic's .debs.

> At which point, BTW, I would
> like to see Checklink and the Validator get better integrated from the POV
> of the user visiting http://validator.w3.org/.

That'd be nice.

-- 
\/ille Skyttä
ville.skytta at iki.fi
Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 13:51:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:43 GMT