Hi,
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 02:45:29PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am considering to working to convert dev-ref to rST+Sphinx this
> summer. I would like to start a discussion about doing that. The
> main things that I need to learn from this discussion are:
>
> - who else is interested in working on this;
>
> - whether I should use the scripts that were used to convert
> debian-policy Debian-SGML->docbook->rST+Sphinx, or instead write a
> new Debian-SGML->rST+Sphinx converter; and
I recommend to do:
Debian-SGML->docbook xml (This is must. This is one line command)
optional
docbook xml -> xml with any tweak if needed
with simple xmlt tricks
(Of course, pandoc converter may be tweaked too)
xml -> rST+Sphinx with pandoc -- my choice
--- Q: How good is this?
xml -> rST+Sphinx with custom xslt scripts
-- if someone care to do...?
Also, we need to pick PO system for rST+Sphinx?
Can anyone point me to it.
* If it is po4a, making PO from matched rST+Sphinx
is no-brainer.
* If it is any other script framework, we can still do it
easily. (via mo file etc.)
I have done some work along this line so we can use that
scripts. https://github.com/osamuaoki/poutils
> - whether there is some reason that this should not be worked on at
> the present time, and whether any of the dev-ref uploaders object to
> the prospect of my unilaterally committing and uploading this
> change.
> With regard to the second item, the question is whether it would be
> significantly more efficient to try to reuse the old scripts.
Yes, as long as we have a matching snapshot of Debian-SGML, it saves a
lot of time. Usually, it is easier to work on XML than SGML if you want
to apply automated script.
> While I worked on the docbook->rST+Sphinx stage of converting
> debian-policy, I was not involved in the Debian-SGML->docbook stage,
> so I need others' input on that.
Hold on a bit. Let me check few things.
> If I end up writing a new conversion script, I don't expect to be able
> to produce a program that will every single bit of markup right, but
> one that would get most of the way there. This approach worked well
> for Policy when we converted that to rST+Sphinx in 2017.
Yes and no. You didn't have translation.
Now that we have nice build script from reST, we should think to
automate as much.
Osamu
