Quoting Paolo Greppi (2020-12-01 10:53:11)
> Il 01/12/20 10:00, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel ha scritto:
> > What about doing something similar to sphinx.
> > Create a package with the doxygen jquery and link to files of this package
> > for all documentations generated via doxygen.
> > provide a dh_do
Il 01/12/20 10:00, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel ha scritto:
What about doing something similar to sphinx.
Create a package with the doxygen jquery and link to files of this package for
all documentations generated via doxygen.
provide a dh_doxygen to do this link like dh_sphinxdoc
Cheers
Fred
I'
Quoting Andrius Merkys (2020-12-01 10:28:16)
> On 2020-12-01 11:00, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote:
> > What about doing something similar to sphinx.
> > Create a package with the doxygen jquery and link to files of this package
> > for all documentations generated via doxygen.
> > provide a dh_dox
On 2020-12-01 11:00, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote:
> What about doing something similar to sphinx.
> Create a package with the doxygen jquery and link to files of this package
> for all documentations generated via doxygen.
> provide a dh_doxygen to do this link like dh_sphinxdoc
+1
In addition
Il 01/12/20 08:18, Niels Thykier ha scritto:
Russ Allbery:
The root problem, at least as I understand it, is that the two relevant
upstreams (and probably lots more) have followed those practices to vendor
and pin versions of jQuery, and are not regularly updating those pins, so
the current vers
Russ Allbery:
> The root problem, at least as I understand it, is that the two relevant
> upstreams (and probably lots more) have followed those practices to vendor
> and pin versions of jQuery, and are not regularly updating those pins, so
> the current version in Debian may or may not work.
As I
Hi,
WordPress has a bunch of these dependencies which float in and out of
lining up between what Debian has and what upstream WordPress uses. As an
added bonus, they sometimes slightly adjust their copies.
I use lintian overrides and dh-linktree and this helps, but the result is
less than good an
Wookey writes:
> Having read #903428 I see there is no enthusiasm for fixing this in the
> tooling. And also that I am not the only person coming across this and
> wondering what to do about it. I've had this experience before with both
> doxygen and javadoc and have spent some years assuming tha
I was just updating a package and got the using lintian grumbling that
javadoc has added 1.3MB of jquery to my package (almost doubling its
installed size).
There are 5 of these on my system (I'm surprised its not more
actually, surely some people must have tens or hundreds of these as
both doxyge
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 4:42 AM Wookey wrote:
>
> On 2019-01-04 20:16 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Quite a few packages have jquery/ embedded in documentation generated by
> > javadoc. This yields to
> >
> > Could openjdk perhaps build a package that would ship jquery/ in a know
On 2019-01-04 20:16 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Quite a few packages have jquery/ embedded in documentation generated by
> javadoc. This yields to
>
> Could openjdk perhaps build a package that would ship jquery/ in a known
> place, and packages would just depend on it and the gene
Le 07/01/2019 à 23:02, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> I'd rather cripple the documentation a bit than removing it :)
The issue is, we keep getting more and more javadoc related issues with
each OpenJDK upgrade. This jquery "issue" is a bit the straw that breaks
the camel's back, and we would rather
Emmanuel Bourg, le lun. 07 janv. 2019 22:25:35 +0100, a ecrit:
> Le 07/01/2019 à 21:13, Nicholas D Steeves a écrit :
> > Do you have any suggestions for working with the following?: (please
> > reply to -devel)
>
> We've discussed this topic in #903428 and the consensus is roughly that
> it's a wa
Hi Nicholas,
Le 07/01/2019 à 21:13, Nicholas D Steeves a écrit :
> Do you have any suggestions for working with the following?: (please
> reply to -devel)
We've discussed this topic in #903428 and the consensus is roughly that
it's a waste of time and we would rather drop the mostly unused javad
Dear Java Team,
Do you have any suggestions for working with the following?: (please
reply to -devel)
On Sun, Jan 06, 2019 at 10:34:50PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2019 at 09:20:34PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Sean Whitton, le sam. 05 janv. 2019 19:48:35 +, a ecrit:
On Sat, Jan 05, 2019 at 09:20:34PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Sean Whitton, le sam. 05 janv. 2019 19:48:35 +, a ecrit:
> > Forgive my ignorance of the specifics of this package, but why can't you
> > add symlinks to the files shipped by libjs-jquery? That is the standard
> > solution.
>
Sean Whitton, le sam. 05 janv. 2019 19:48:35 +, a ecrit:
> Forgive my ignorance of the specifics of this package, but why can't you
> add symlinks to the files shipped by libjs-jquery? That is the standard
> solution.
openjdk's javadoc not only includes libjs-query, but also jszip,
jszip-util
Hello Samuel,
On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 08:16pm +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Quite a few packages have jquery/ embedded in documentation generated by
> javadoc. This yields to
>
> «
> libfoo-java shares 1.2 MB of similar files with package
> liblizzie-java-doc, please investigate whether it is pos
18 matches
Mail list logo
