Bug#986984: unblock: debian-edu-doc/2.11.22
[Holger Levsen] > I'll guess I'll invent something myself then... What about looking for selected keywords like 'Debian Edu', 'Skolelinux, "$(lsb_release -c -s)" or similar by grepping the documentation files, to ensure the content is somewhat relevant? And perhaps linting the HTML (weblint-perl?) and epub (epubcheck?) files to verify the format is correct? -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen
Bug#986984: unblock: debian-edu-doc/2.11.22
Hi Paul, On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 09:56:01PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > I guess that's about the best we can do for such -doc packages. I > realize it's slightly "unfair" because of the different treatment we > have in the current freeze, but I wonder if adding autopkgtest (to test > as-installed packages) is really worth it for such packages. > Documentation changes and translations have always been on the exception > list, even very explicitly this time around [1], so I think we're happy > to just unblock manually. Having said that, I'll not stop you from > adding the test. :) thanks for your comments! TBH I was hoping for some prior art in some other doc package, not primarily to ease testing migration but rather to make sure the contents are as we would like them to be. we've had failures to build pdf|epub|html versions of some languages in the past and it would be nice to catch those automatically. I'll guess I'll invent something myself then... -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C ⠈⠳⣄ There are no jobs on a dead planet. (Also many other things but people mostly seem to care about jobs.) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#986984: unblock: debian-edu-doc/2.11.22
Hi Holger, On 19-04-2021 10:56, Holger Levsen wrote: >> The excuses says it's blocked because it "does not have autopkgtest". > > speaking of which, what would be a non superficial autopkgtest for > debian-edu-doc? would be running "file" on all created html, pdf and > epub files be enough? (and checking that those are indeed html, pdf > and epub files :) I guess that's about the best we can do for such -doc packages. I realize it's slightly "unfair" because of the different treatment we have in the current freeze, but I wonder if adding autopkgtest (to test as-installed packages) is really worth it for such packages. Documentation changes and translations have always been on the exception list, even very explicitly this time around [1], so I think we're happy to just unblock manually. Having said that, I'll not stop you from adding the test. :) Paul [1] https://release.debian.org/bullseye/freeze_policy.html#appropriate OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#986984: unblock: debian-edu-doc/2.11.22
Hi Paul, On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 09:57:38PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 02:23:22 +0200 Holger Levsen wrote: > > Please unblock package debian-edu-doc 2.11.22, it adds a new translation > > and thus > > a new binary package and won't migrate on its own: > The excuses says it's blocked because it "does not have autopkgtest". speaking of which, what would be a non superficial autopkgtest for debian-edu-doc? would be running "file" on all created html, pdf and epub files be enough? (and checking that those are indeed html, pdf and epub files :) > You *should* be right though, it should *also* be blocked because it has > a new package. > > Anyways, unblocked. thank you! -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C ⠈⠳⣄ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
