Bug 1119098

This is not a regression. The fact that this was ever allowed was a regression in PressGang 1.4 (see BZ#1097062). As such I'm converting this to an RFE.

Does this mean that this RFE will not get implemented? Also, is there any good reason that the ability to nest sections was removed to begin with? 

What we have here is a feature that was actually being used by users (OpenStack team), and it has since been taken away. Is there any *practical* use case that made BZ#1097062 absolutely necessary?

Initial testing of csprocessor-1.8.1-2 against the dev server shows that specs with topics including nested sections used in initial text containers works as expected with the --skip-nested-section-validation flag.

Will do some more testing though.

See Also and Prerequisites links will have to be disabled when using the --skip-nested-section-validation flag. Currently having these links on a topic with nested sections will either fail validation when the spec is built, or create invalid XML that publican can not build.

There is something odd happening with Parts too. The following snippet (where topic 1234 is a topic with nested sections):

Part: Test Part
  Chapter: Release Notes
    Initial Text:
      Release Notes [1234]
    Release Notes [1234] 

Generated the following error:

ERROR: Line 50: Invalid Topic! The Topic specified has content that cannot be used in the initial content of a Chapter/Preface/Section/Appendix/Part.
       -> Release Notes [1234]
ERROR: The Content Specification is not valid.

These snippets work though:

Part: Test Part
  Chapter: Release Notes
#    Initial Text:
#      Release Notes [1234]
    Release Notes [1234] 

or

Part: Test Part
  Chapter: Release Notes
    Initial Text:
      Release Notes [1234]
#    Release Notes [1234]

Confirmed that csprocessor-1.8.1-3 fixes the issues with Parts. All other edge cases I could think of worked ok.

For future reference, this was the test spec. The revision history and feedback topics, as well as the Release Notes topic had nested sections.

Title = Nested section test
Subtitle = Nested section test
Product = PressGang
Abstract = Abstract
Version = 5
Format = DocBook 4.5
Copyright Holder = Red Hat, Inc
Brand = RedHat
Bug Links = Bugzilla
Default Preface = On
BZProduct = Red Hat OpenStack
BZComponent = doc-Release_Notes
Revision History = [1234]
Author Group = [1235]
Legal Notice = [1236]
Feedback = [1237]
Locale = en-US

[condition = acondition]
Chapter: Chapter with child
  Release Notes [1238] [T1]

Chapter: Chapter with Initial Text
  Initial Text: [T2]
    Release Notes [1238]

Process: Process with nested topics
  Release Notes [1238]
  Release Notes [1238]

Part: Test Part
  Chapter: Release Notes
    Initial Text:
      Release Notes [1238]
    Release Notes [1238]

Appendix: Test Appendix
  Release Notes [1238] [T4]

I just want to note that while the above does let you build content with nested sections, it still is unsupported so if you use nested sections you are using them at your own risk. Some things that will not work are:

- Report a bug and editor links
- Relationships
- Multiple initial text topics with nested sections (this won't validate anyways for other reasons).
- Linking to the nested sections from other topics (you can probably hack a way to do this but there isn't any promise it'll work long term)
- DocBuilder
- The WebUI live rendering

Thanks guys. When can we get csprocessor-1.8.1-3 for testing?

Also:

(In reply to Lee Newson from comment #12)
> I just want to note that while the above does let you build content with
> nested sections, it still is unsupported so if you use nested sections you
> are using them at your own risk. Some things that will not work are:
> 
> - Report a bug and editor links
> - Relationships
> - Multiple initial text topics with nested sections (this won't validate
> anyways for other reasons).
> - Linking to the nested sections from other topics (you can probably hack a
> way to do this but there isn't any promise it'll work long term)
> - DocBuilder
> - The WebUI live rendering

If by 'Relationships' you mean the 'See Also' and 'Prerequisite' links, then that's fine. We don't use them anymore for RHOS5 docs onwards (we use in-topic 'Inject' instead). 

We are OK without the rest of the things on this list as well.

(In reply to Don Domingo from comment #13)
> Thanks guys. When can we get csprocessor-1.8.1-3 for testing?
> 
> Also:
> 
> (In reply to Lee Newson from comment #12)
> > I just want to note that while the above does let you build content with
> > nested sections, it still is unsupported so if you use nested sections you
> > are using them at your own risk. Some things that will not work are:
> > 
> > - Report a bug and editor links
> > - Relationships
> > - Multiple initial text topics with nested sections (this won't validate
> > anyways for other reasons).
> > - Linking to the nested sections from other topics (you can probably hack a
> > way to do this but there isn't any promise it'll work long term)
> > - DocBuilder
> > - The WebUI live rendering
> 
> If by 'Relationships' you mean the 'See Also' and 'Prerequisite' links, then
> that's fine. We don't use them anymore for RHOS5 docs onwards (we use
> in-topic 'Inject' instead). 
> 
> We are OK without the rest of the things on this list as well.

We need to apply a patch to the servers as well, I'll email you guys the details after we do that today. Also yeah that is what I meant by "Relationships".

Closing this as WONTFIX since we do not want to allow nested sections. We have however added the workaround for anyone who specifically wants to use nested sections, but as mentioned above this is done at the writers risk. Additionally using the "--skip-nested-sections" workaround has the side effects mentioned in comment #12.