On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 10:15:19AM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon 15 Apr 2024 at 09:59am GMT, Holger Levsen wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 08:43:51PM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote: > >> ... but if dev-ref is already shipping both, maybe singlepage is indeed > >> usable these days ... > > > > I think it is. > > > >> > Could the Policy Editors team check, if everything is fine now, and if > >> > this should be published again? > >> > At least there is still an issue with the footnotes, there are 16 > >> > occurrences > >> > of #id1 for example... (search for "[1]" in policy-1.html). > >> Hrm. That seems like a pretty serious problem :\ > > > > I wouldnt call it serious. annoying yes, maybe. > > > >> Holger L., did you know about this issue? > >> Did you decide it was worth publishing anyway? > > > > yes. > > > > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#how-could-installing-a-package-into-testing-possibly-break-other-packages > > or (single page) > > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/developers-reference.en.html#how-could-installing-a-package-into-testing-possibly-break-other-packages > > both show four footnotes, right where they belong, it's just that > > each foot note is numbered and that [1] or [2] or whatever is > > a link, pointing to a wrong place. > > > > I agree it's a bug, but I do think it's a pretty harmless one. > > Thanks. I'd be grateful for some feedback from other regular Policy > contributors.
My view is that any issue with single-page is much more likely to be fixed if we use it than if we do not. I note that the links from the text to the footnotes are correct, it is only the backlink from the footnotes to the text which are wrong. I consider this minor. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here.
