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. -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C ⠈⠳⣄ "Any fool can know. The point is to understand." - A. Einstein
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
