Re: Doc package naming

[Ian Lynagh <igloo@earth.li>]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:04:11AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> 
> For of all, I don't like libghc6-*-doc, because many of these packages
> are useful not just for GHC, but also for Hugs.

I was using libghc6-foo-doc because there were hugs libraries built from
separate source packages. If they're unified then I'd use
libhaskell-foo-doc.

Note that if ghc doesn't build on a platform then you don't have
haddock, so can't update a doc index. You also can't create docs on such
a platform. However, currently ghc builds on all platforms.

> Secondly, why duplicate "haskell" in haskell-haskelldb-doc?

Consistency.

> Thirdly, though, does using the source name in ftphs-doc make sense?

I don't understand what you're asking.


Thanks
Ian