Hi Ahmad, Le 2025-01-21 19:28, Ahmad Khalifa a écrit :
I'll play around with 2 sources and 2 branches on 1 salsa repo. See if that looks good.
This is not a good idea, as a separate source package it should have its own separate repository. That's much less confusing for some standard tools and for other people that may have to work on the package later.
I always thought of html as a source markup until lintian complained about source-is-missing.
Even when it's generated that lintian error can be irrelevant: sometimes upstream provide generated reports (e.g. benchmarks or compatibility) that are helpful but can't be easily reproduced or could be generated by non-free tools even though the produced documents are free.
Upstream has several versioned tarballs (on sf.net [1]), but they don't package or even document the doc tools. They probably consider it too much plumbing for anyone to use. Anyway for it to be compiled on testing, it needs old regex api (libpcre), so first thing is maybe to patch the tool to use pcre2 regex.
That's something you would have to explicitly ask upstream to provide (e.g. through an issue or feature request), by explaining to them that this will make the long-term maintenance of the documentation easier, e.g. when features or bugfixes are backported from a newer version into a stable version.
Thank you for working on this. Cheers, -- Julien Plissonneau Duquène
