On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 01:36:51PM -0400, John J. McDonough wrote:
From: "Paul Frields" <stickster(a)gmail.com>
> Hi guys,
>
> (1) This sort of call for review/help should be on the
> fedora-docs-list where more people can help. It's open source!
Point taken. I still need to get used to this. This seemed so grody I
didn't think the larger goup would care, but then again, being selfish, I
am always interested in learning more, and the more eyes, the more chances
i have to learn! My main motivation in sharing this was so that I wasn't
the only person who knew what I was up to, but there is no reason the
three of you have to be the only ones.
On the other hand, this could be a little misleading without some
warnings. The script essentially builds the rpm, and I am the LAST person
anyone should be looking to for advice on building an rpm. In addition,
this is a transition time, and much of what is in there we hope not to
deal with for Fedora 12. Most if this is fedora-docs-utils stuff that we
hope will be Publican, and some of the Publican stuff are things we hope
will be dealt with in Publican, so certainly, nobody should put too much
value on this script.
I've been in your shoes many times, so I understand the trepidation!
Just rest easily knowing that you've improved transparency, we should
all try not to make perfect the enemy of the good, and so on.
On the other hand, it is certainly a treasure trove of ungainly
hacks.
A kindred soul! :-D
I made the rpm for RC in two steps, so in the latest version, the
Publican
parts are commented out. I have since pushed the I18n.xml that has the
offending paragraph commented out, so I should be able to run the script
from start to finish, but haven't actually done that yet. After we get
the RC done, I intend to do that so that when any zero day issues are
swatted, we can just run the script to make the rpm.
> (2) Is help still needed?
The package that went to RC has the offending paragraph commented out. We
still have absolutely no clue what is going on there. We need someone a
lot more knowledgable about Publican (hint, hint) to help sort it out. As
I said, I pushed the version of I18n.xml that has the offending paragraph
(and I mean XML paragraph here, from <para> to </para>, it is actually a
table) commented out. Uncommenting it and generating html in any
non-English language should expose the problem. Because of the need to
merge the po's, it might be easier to do this from the srpm than from git.
It will certainly be quicker as the po merge takes some time.
Is this the problem that Ruediger just wrestled to ground? The
quotation mark issue?
--
Paul W. Frields
http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - -
http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug