Bug#930553: version-nexttesting should be "11" (not "10")

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#930553: version-nexttesting should be "11" (not "10")

Osamu Aoki
Package: src:developers-reference
Version: 3.4.24
Severity: normal

While doing sphinx conversion, I realized that it may be better to
update as follows:

----
$ git diff
diff --git a/common.ent b/common.ent
index 83eddf3..900ce90 100644
--- a/common.ent
+++ b/common.ent
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
 <!-- common entities file

      Bits of text which are language independent.  In some cases it
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
 <!ENTITY version-oldstable "8">
 <!ENTITY version-stable "9">
 <!ENTITY version-testing "10">
-<!ENTITY version-nexttesting "10">
+<!ENTITY version-nexttesting "11">

 <!-- standard information -->
 <!ENTITY fsf-addr "Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
----

Obvious ... I guess.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 10.0
  APT prefers unstable-debug
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'testing-debug'), (500, 'testing'), (10, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-5-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#930553: version-nexttesting should be "11" (not "10")

Holger Levsen-2
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 09:04:24PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> While doing sphinx conversion, I realized that it may be better to
> update as follows:

Thanks for the bug report, fixed in git.

Now I wonder, dies it make sense to do an upload now, for buster, and
then another upload with these numbers changed, for bullseye, once
buster is out:

>  <!ENTITY version-oldstable "8">
>  <!ENTITY version-stable "9">
>  <!ENTITY version-testing "10">
>  <!ENTITY version-nexttesting "11">
 
?

--
tschau,
        Holger

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#930565: dev-ref: should use distro-info instead of hardcoding version numbers

Holger Levsen-2
package: developers-reference
severity: wishlist
x-debbugs-cc: Osamu Aoki <[hidden email]>, [hidden email]

On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 03:53:07PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Now I wonder, dies it make sense to do an upload now, for buster, and
> then another upload with these numbers changed, for bullseye, once
> buster is out:
>
> >  <!ENTITY version-oldstable "8">
> >  <!ENTITY version-stable "9">
> >  <!ENTITY version-testing "10">
> >  <!ENTITY version-nexttesting "11">

actually, I just realized that these numbers should be incremented
*now*, for an upload aimed at bullseye.

and then for bullseye we should use distro-info(-data). (wondering how
to do this sensibly at run time and not at build time...)


--
tschau,
        Holger

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#930553: how about encoding ???

Osamu Aoki
In reply to this post by Holger Levsen-2
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 03:53:07PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 09:04:24PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > While doing sphinx conversion, I realized that it may be better to
> > update as follows:
...

If you see my initial diff on the first line of common.ent

 -<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
 +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>

Although for ASCII code range (7-bits), iso-8859-1, utf-8, ascii are the
same, shouldn't we use UTF-8 in line with XML code?  Was there any
specific issues to do this?

THis is no rush but I think this is the right way.... (Am I wrong?)

Regards,

Osamu

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#930600: dev-ref: common.ent should be switched to utf-8

Holger Levsen-2
package: developers-reference
severity: minor
x-debbugs-cc: Osamu Aoki <[hidden email]>, [hidden email]


On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 09:23:42AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:

> If you see my initial diff on the first line of common.ent
>
>  -<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
>  +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
>
> Although for ASCII code range (7-bits), iso-8859-1, utf-8, ascii are the
> same, shouldn't we use UTF-8 in line with XML code?  Was there any
> specific issues to do this?
>
> THis is no rush but I think this is the right way.... (Am I wrong?)
agreed & thanks for pointing this out as well.

post buster material though :)


--
tschau,
        Holger

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment