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

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

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 19:37:54 +0100
To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <a0106000b-1024-C01439B14B4B11D789E10030657B83E8@[]>

Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch> wrote:

>what was the decision about storing the RPM/DEBs and their
>dependencies on v.w.o ?

I've made the /source/ page point at a /dist/ directory on v.w3.org with
the intention that this directory will not exist in CVS. This is where I
intended that anything downloadable should reside.

Whether or not to host the binary packages and the dependencies there
depend entirely on what you and Ville think is best. If it is practical for
you and for users to host it there I think that makes sense (IIRC Olivier
also thinks this would be ok, right?).

It probably makes sense to keep development/interrim versions on your own
web sites, but I see now reason why they couldn't also be on v.w3.org if
you would prefer. The big hurdle is probably that it's a PITA to get things
uploaded there ATM as Olivier and the other W3Cers are the only ones with
sufficient privileges to put stuff in place ATM (though that can probably
be fixed if we need to).

>I'll have to do a diff again to make sure that I don't forget anything
>(I haven't really looked at the validator since mid-January), but I
>remember 2 things. First, I added a note on the "source" page saying
>that if you are on a Debian system, you can see the source by doing bla
>bla and bla.

Can this reasonably be integrated into the v.w3.org version so you won't
have to maintain this diff?

>The second thing is about the SGML lib. At the moment, you can configure
>the script to tell it where the SGML library is -- and the name of the
>catalog(s) files is then hardcoded (and they are supposed to be in the
>same directory). This doesn't work very well if the system provides a
>centralised catalog ! At the moment, I have just adapted sgml.soc and
>xml.soc so that they reference the Debian DTDs and I added a new
>configuration option (SGML Catalog if I remember well) so that I can
>store these in a different dictionary. In the near future, I would like
>to use Debian's centralised SGML and (future) XML catalogs, and get rid
>of sgml.soc and xml.soc entirely -- this would require more changes to
>the configuration file.

I'll see what I can do to make this work better for Debian. It would help
if you could describe the directory structure and relevant filenames for

Ville: Can we use the vendor sgml-lib on Red Hat? Integrate with it?

In the 0.7.0 timeframe we should be able to provide a suffieciently clean
sgml-lib package -- possibly the proposed separate DTD registry/collection
project -- that we could propose Red Hat use that instead/in addition to
what they ship now.

>Oh, and of course, there is the Debian sub-directory, which contains all
>packaging information, but it is usually not recommended to add it to
>the original source -- the main reason being that the Debian developer,
>in general, will not have CVS write access to the original source and he
>doesn't want an outdated debian/ directory to overwrite his newer local
>version when he updates to a new release.

If it should become practical/necessary I'm sure we can arrange CVS write
access for you somehow. I dunno how fine-grained the "ACL" is for
dev.w3.org, but there are other ways to arrange it if that should prove

Ville maintains the spec file (more or less?) in CVS, but I dunno whether
that would make sense for you and the Debian package.

>And last thing, a small suggestion that I remember writing in my TODO
>file (on another machine), I don't think it's been added in the CVS
>version yet: turning on the "debug" option should automatically turn on
>the "verbose" option as well, or you won't see any debugging

I think I have this in my TODO somewhere too. Ping me about it if it hasn't
been fixed when I tag 0.6.2 in CVS will you?

Now Playing "Let Me Put My Love Into You" by "AC/DC"",
 from the album "Back In Black".
Received on Friday, 28 February 2003 13:38:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:54:45 UTC