- From: Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 00:32:30 +1100
- To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Cc: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <7lfm6v4nskmlstn9brlbjr62vbe616ncof@4ax.com>
Le Fri, 28 Feb 2003 19:37:54 +0100, tu as ecrit : >> 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?). I'll have the package (and its dependencies) on my site in any case, but it may be a good idea to mirror it on v.w.o, if only to ensure that the packages will always be available at a "stable" URL, even if someone take over the package maintenance. A cron'd sync (as suggested by Olivier) would be fine, this way I won't need any special access to a w3c server. >> 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? Yes -- see attached diff. Comments welcome (about content or grammar). > 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 > me. The situation is as follows: - /etc/sgml contains all the catalogs, including the main catalog (/etc/sgml/catalog) which references the other catalogs (/etc/sgml/w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat, etc). - all the DTDs are stored in subdirectories of /usr/share/sgml As far as I know, the validator does not really need to know about the catalog (onsgmls knows about the main catalog), but it has to add /etc/sgml and /usr/share/sgml to SGML_SEARCH_PATH because of the -R option. Just an idea about a possible way to do it: - have an option in the config file which specifies additional directories that should be added to SGML_SEARCH_PATH; - leave the "SGML Library" config option empty in the Debian package, and modify check so that it does not specify a catalog for onsgmls in this case. In any case, it would certainly be worth moving some hardcoded options (like the catalog names, xml.soc etc) into the configuration file in a way or another. > 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. Following Ville's comment ("I believe the vendor libs are currently only a small subset of what we want to be able to validate against"), I was wondering: which DTDs should the validator be able to validate against ? Debian doesn't contain all the DTDs that are provided in sgml-lib, but do we really need all of them ? If needed, I can package the missing ones, but some of them do not seem essential. > Ville maintains the spec file (more or less?) in CVS, but I dunno > whether that would make sense for you and the Debian package. No, an independant /debian dir is the best solution at the moment. > 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? Will do ! Frédéric
Attachments
- text/plain attachment: email.txt
Received on Sunday, 9 March 2003 08:32:51 UTC