After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 705473 - gstreamer 1.0 devhelp not parallel *usable* with 0.10
gstreamer 1.0 devhelp not parallel *usable* with 0.10
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: GStreamer
Classification: Platform
Component: documentation
1.0.9
Other Linux
: Normal minor
: 1.1.1
Assigned To: GStreamer Maintainers
GStreamer Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2013-08-05 06:21 UTC by Rafał Mużyło
Modified: 2013-09-09 09:28 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Rafał Mużyło 2013-08-05 06:21:21 UTC
While the docs are parallel installable with 0.10, as some of them weren't renamed, devhelp sees only one version each (as it affects plugins docs too).

That's cause <book> element has the same 'name' attribute for both sets.
I don't know much about gtk-doc, but it seems, that the most simple solution would be to rename the base doc file (i.e. adding '-1.0' in the name) and making the necessary changes in all relevant Makefile.am.
Comment 1 Olivier Crête 2013-08-05 09:34:06 UTC
This is fixed in 1.2,but we haven't cherry-picked that patch into 1.0 because it changes some filename, Tim?
Comment 2 Tim-Philipp Müller 2013-08-05 11:40:20 UTC
Remind me which commit that was? I don't seem to be able to find it right now
Comment 3 Olivier Crête 2013-08-05 13:25:37 UTC
From common, the patch is 2de221ce94b657f9c9
Comment 4 Tim-Philipp Müller 2013-08-13 13:38:13 UTC
Don't know, not violently opposed to this, just thinking about hassle for packagers. But then, the benefit is quite significant, I guess. Feel free to cherry-pick it into common/1.0. Just need to make sure to add a comment to the release notes/mail if we do.
Comment 5 Tim-Philipp Müller 2013-09-09 09:28:36 UTC
Ok, I'm going to call this and say that it's not worth picking this into the 1.0 branch at this point.

It will be fixed properly in 1.2.

Sorry for the inconvenience!