1 |
If tidy-html5 can take care of anything htmltidy can, then we can boot the |
2 |
latter as obsolete anyhow. Are there any backwards compatibility issues if |
3 |
we just punt it and let tidy-html5 take over? |
4 |
|
5 |
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Yury German <blueknight@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
|
7 |
> |
8 |
> |
9 |
> On 6/5/16 8:02 PM, Patrice Clement wrote: |
10 |
> > Sunday 05 Jun 2016 19:39:26, Yury German wrote : |
11 |
> >> app-text/htmltidy currently has no maintainers. It has a vulnerability |
12 |
> >> [Security Bug] filed against it. And a number of other [package depend |
13 |
> >> on it]. Is nyone willing to pick it up? |
14 |
> >> |
15 |
> >> [Secuity Bug] |
16 |
> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=561452 |
17 |
> >> |
18 |
> >> [package depend on it] |
19 |
> >> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/genrdeps/dindex/app-text/htmltidy |
20 |
> >> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/genrdeps/rindex/app-text/htmltidy |
21 |
> |
22 |
> > Don't bother. Have a look at [1], [2] & [3] to find out why. |
23 |
> > |
24 |
> > tl;dr |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> > htmltidy has got to be culled at some point since it's now considered |
27 |
> obsolete |
28 |
> > after tidy-html5 entered the tree a little while ago. It's roughly the |
29 |
> same |
30 |
> > codebase yet it's HTML 5 compliant. Yay! |
31 |
> > |
32 |
> > I've been maintaining the latter since its inclusion in the Portage tree |
33 |
> but |
34 |
> > would definitely need help to remove the former. I didn't swap htmltidy |
35 |
> for |
36 |
> > tidy-html5 cause they're two different projects. As you can see from the |
37 |
> links |
38 |
> > above, htmltidy has a gazillion deps. |
39 |
> > |
40 |
> > [1]: http://tidy.sourceforge.net/ |
41 |
> > [2]: http://www.html-tidy.org/ |
42 |
> > [3]: https://github.com/htacg/tidy-html5 |
43 |
> > |
44 |
> |
45 |
> This is all agreed, but unless someone is driving this it will never get |
46 |
> removed from tree. The security patch is one thing, but cleaning it up |
47 |
> and switching to tidy-html5 is why we need a maintainer so that we can |
48 |
> get rid of the dependencies otherwise it will sit there unsecured for |
49 |
> the next 5 years. |
50 |
> |
51 |
> |
52 |
> |