[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#144456: ITP: qref -- debian quick reference.



On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 08:27:02PM -0700, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi folks, 
> 
> We (me and Ramakrishnan) need help from you on "Best Practice for
> Documentation Packaging."

Let me get back this initial question. 

Ideal package split seems:

Sources:
debian-reference_1.00.tar.gz
debian-reference_1.00.dsc

Binary:
debian-reference-common_1.00.all.deb
   All local files depends on this package.
   This creates directry structure if needed
   In future, if "Depends" becomes local sensistive under future
   installer, this can be the package ser worry.

debian-reference-en_1.00.all.deb
debian-reference-fr_1.00.all.deb
debian-reference-pt-br_1.00.all.deb   (pt_BR is not possible)

Each packages changelog etc. goes to 
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference-en/
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference-fr/
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference-pt-br/

I think I can do this by imitating apt-howto.  It is more than dh_make
though.

*** Now comes difficult parts: where does documents goes? ****
Here are few options.  I think "Type B" option is good and I want my
package to follow.  Your input appreciated.

== Install directories (Type A1):
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/index.en.html
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.en.txt.gz
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.en.pdf

/usr/share/doc/fr/debian-reference/index.fr.html
/usr/share/doc/fr/debian-reference/debian-reference.fr.txt.gz
/usr/share/doc/fr/debian-reference/debian-reference.fr.pdf

Should we use pt_BR or pt-br here?

Comment: consistent with some locale sppecific directory policy some
people prefer.  Redundant extension but simpler script to generate them.
This is like manual pages.  So nice for consistency.

== Install directories (Type A2):
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/index.html
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.txt.gz
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.pdf

/usr/share/doc/fr/debian-reference/index.html
/usr/share/doc/fr/debian-reference/debian-reference.txt.gz
/usr/share/doc/fr/debian-reference/debian-reference.pdf

Comment: consistent with some locale sppecific directory policy some
people prefer.  No-redundant extension but comples script to generate
them since source.lang.sgml is expected to be the source.

== Install directories (Type B):
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/index.en.html
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.en.txt.gz
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.en.pdf

/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/index.fr.html
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.fr.txt.gz
/usr/share/doc/debian-reference/debian-reference.fr.pdf

Comment: Simpler with apach web auto language select. Nice for browsing.
Even if "en" is not "Original Document and missing", simple script can
find them and index them if similar structure is used for DDP web.  For
apache auto language select, I think source SGML shall be
debian-reference.en.sgml to allow above index.en.sgml easily.  This also
leads to debian-reference.fr.pdf as the most easily created files.

This is not Javier's directory structure but makefile to create this can
be used for DDP site with simple change in PUBLISHDIR :)  With this
structure we can always grep file names based on language and file
types.

Compromise may be to use combination of Type A1 and Type B with one of
it in symlink. Then you get very busy /usr/share/doc/debian-reference/*.

Anyway, I think Javier's FTP site arrangement must be argued with above
in mind.  

-- 
~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ +++++
 Osamu Aoki @ Cupertino CA USA
 See "User's Guide":     http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/users-guide/
 See "Debian reference": http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/
 "Debian reference" Project at: http://qref.sf.net

 I welcome your constructive criticisms and corrections.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: