Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 50 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
[WiP] gtk-doc: patch the on-line DocBook XSL paths to the local #56504
This is what's done in Guix, so
Motivation for this change
Cleaning up, robustness.
The [WiP] tag is because I couldn't test the impact on the other packages due to the limits of my hardware and Internet connection, and also because much of those packages fail for the deprecation warnings, not sure what that means.
This is what's done in Guix, so `gtkdoc-mkhtml` would in no case even try to reach for the Internet. Also removed `dblatex`, because it was never enabled and causes circular dependencies if it is. The `--disable-scrollkeeper` configure flag isn't recognized by now. And `doCheck` should be left alone, as long as the tests pass.
The URI is, in the first place, an identifier of the stylesheet; the method the stylesheet will be obtained is independent of this. The primary source for locating the resources is the XML catalog; the fact that the URI can be used as a web URL is secondary and should not bother us – we, as packagers, are responsible for making the proper catalogs available.
I like the idea of limiting the scope where docbook-xsl is available to gtk-doc. In nixpkgs, sometimes the runtime dependencies of build tools are made available through dependencies of the depending package. This is usually done when the dependency is only used for a specific subsystem of the build tool (e.g. PDF generation) and we do not want to increase the closure of the tool for people who only need HTML export. However, since DocBook support will almost always be used, adding the stylesheet as a direct dependency to gtk-doc makes sense.
I am not very fond of patching over the URI with store path directly, though. I would rather rely on the catalogs still (perhaps using
Hello, I'm a bot and I thank you in the name of the community for your contributions.
Nixpkgs is a busy repository, and unfortunately sometimes PRs get left behind for too long. Nevertheless, we'd like to help committers reach the PRs that are still important. This PR has had no activity for 180 days, and so I marked it as stale, but you can rest assured it will never be closed by a non-human.
If this is still important to you and you'd like to remove the stale label, we ask that you leave a comment. Your comment can be as simple as "still important to me". But there's a bit more you can do:
If you received an approval by an unprivileged maintainer and you are just waiting for a merge, you can @ mention someone with merge permissions and ask them to help. You might be able to find someone relevant by using Git blame on the relevant files, or via GitHub's web interface. You can see if someone's a member of the nixpkgs-committers team, by hovering with the mouse over their username on the web interface, or by searching them directly on the list.
If your PR wasn't reviewed at all, it might help to find someone who's perhaps a user of the package or module you are changing, or alternatively, ask once more for a review by the maintainer of the package/module this is about. If you don't know any, you can use Git blame on the relevant files, or GitHub's web interface to find someone who touched the relevant files in the past.
If your PR has had reviews and nevertheless got stale, make sure you've responded to all of the reviewer's requests / questions. Usually when PR authors show responsibility and dedication, reviewers (privileged or not) show dedication as well. If you've pushed a change, it's possible the reviewer wasn't notified about your push via email, so you can always officially request them for a review, or just @ mention them and say you've addressed their comments.