Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> writes: > On 11/24/2012 01:54 AM, Gert Wollny wrote:
>> Now I've seen that Doxgen has the jquery-1.3.2.js file in the debian/ >> directory and in fact with this script the pages display correctly. My >> question is now, should I also include this source file in the source >> distribution, or would it suffice to document that the source code to >> the copressed files can be found with the according doxygen version? > In Debian, you should always be able to build from source. So if you > could use the original source code, and delete the binary file (eg: the > minimized jscript) that would be the best option. Sadly, that's not really helpful advice for Gert, since his package just has Doxygen-generated documentation. The jquery code is coming from Doxygen. So from his perspective, he *is* building from source, but Doxygen, when building the documentation from comments, is including a Javascript library that Lintian is complaining about. > P.S: The above isn't an approval for embedding yet another version of > jquery in your package, I think it should be avoided as well if > possible. Probably one of the options is to patch upstream source code > so that it can work with the target Debian package and still render > well. I have no idea how practical that would be though. This would be something that would need to be done in the doxygen package, not in Gert's package. For right now, I think the best thing for the Doxygen *clients* to do is just ignore this issue. It may need a bug against doxygen, though (and possibly some help for the Doxygen maintainer). -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d2z4hywu....@windlord.stanford.edu
