Request for Docs Freeze Extension for Serverguide

[Matthew East]

[trimming the circulation list a bit]

On 22 March 2012 11:39, Peter Matulis <peter.matulis at canonical.com> wrote:
> On 12-03-22 04:04 AM, Matthew East wrote:
>> On 21 March 2012 19:19, Peter Matulis <peter.matulis at canonical.com> wrote:
>>> A small but important change is that we want to make
>>> the XML validation step part and parcel of the actual build.  It was
>>> found that some people were omitting this step which led to some
>>> non-trivial headaches.  Anyone wanting to lend a hand in at least
>>> validating existing material please head on over to:
>>
>> It should be enough that contributors use the validations script
>> provided in the branch before submitting their branches, and that
>> reviewers use the same script when merging branches. I'm very happy to
>> take care of any validation errors that remain by this weekend.
>
> Why not make it part of the build process itself?  It's one less command
> to type and it could have really helped in the last few days.

Ok, if it is thought to help, no problem. If contributors are building
html or pdf as part of their testing procedure, then perhaps they will
notice validation errors.

> Another problem we're having is the build of the PDF.  It was found that
> tables are not displaying properly and that footnotes in HTML lists will
> not even show if there is not a certain version of the 'fop' package in
> use on the build machine.  New issues, which I don't quite understand
> yet, emerged yesterday in a particular branch contribution.
>
> I'm CC'ing Doug Smythies as he has been putting in a lot of effort to
> analyze and resolve most of the PDF issues.  Doug, please chime in if
> you have anything to add.

I've seen that work, and it is great stuff with a difficult concept.
I'm not sure there is a way around the issues you describe though,
because fop is quite a tricky technology...

-- 
Matthew East
http://www.mdke.org
gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF