Re: Documentation Policy
On Jun 24, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote
>
> But I still dislike automatic building. If you just want not having to
> fetch the source package, what about a foo-doc-texi binary package (on a
> "do whatever you want with it" basis), which just ships the .texi source?
Better still (IMO, of course :) would be to have a foo-doc-source (AKA
foo-doc-texi, except that it isn't necessarily texinfo; it could be SGML,
for instance) package, which can be used to make *packages* containing
the docs in whatever format you require, which could then be installed
and deinstalled in the normal way. A large problem with this is keeping
the versions of documentation installed the same as the version of the
package.
Another way to do it might be to distribute `dummy' packages foo-doc-html
and so on, which depend on the foo-doc-source and which generate the
correct form on-the-fly. This would save mirror space, but would require
the doc-source to be installed (since it would have to Depend on the
doc-source package).
&E
--
Andy Mortimer, andy.mortimer@poboxes.com
http://www.poboxes.com/andy.mortimer
PGP public key available on key servers
--
I found myself alone, alone above a raging sea
That stole the only girl I loved and drowned her deep inside of me.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: