On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 09:50:42 +0100, Alessio wrote:
Hello, I already discussed that in the Telegram group.
Pydicom package fails to build (apart due to the test phase), because
upstream introduced sphinx-copybutton  module in order to build the
documentation. sphinx-copybutton is not packaged in Fedora.
In order to build sphinx-copybutton, some js files are needed .
These files are from another repository and they will end to be bundled
in the sphinx-copybutton package, that it should be avoided. So also
this clipboard.js should be packaged.
Well, as you know I'm a casual packager, so I'm not too skilled.
I've tinkered a bit with packaging clipboard.js  and sphinx-
copybutton . And it could work.
But, is it worth it to submit two new packages for the review process
just in order to include documentation in the python-pydicom package?
Just reiterating what I'd suggested so that everyone has complete
context: I don't think it is worth it. We are also seeing other Python
packages where building the sphinx documentation bundles in fonts and
other JS, and it's really a lot of work to unbundle them. Also, at every
update, the package will have to be re-checked to see if anything new
has been bundled in that needs removing etc. So from a maintenance
perspective, this is not worth it the effort---especially given that
most Python projects host online documentation on readthedocs.io etc.
So my suggestion is to skip building the docs, and include the online
documentation URL in the package description.
This is what I did for the new python-meautility package. As you'll see
in the review ticket, Andy reviewed the package and agreed that
unbundling these bits is too much extra work---they're doing it for
another package at the moment:
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
Time zone: Europe/London