Re: [Pkg-haskell-commits] darcs: haskell-json: New version 0.4.4.
Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva wrote:
> I don't know if you're going to consider this a good explanantion, but these
> points came to my mind:
>
> * It's not needed to have a doc-base entry for every haskell library, since
> ghc6 library documentation links to them, and if there should be an entry in
> doc-base for haskell libraries, it should be in ghc6.
>
> * We don't want to fill doc-base with a lot of haskell related entries:
>
> $ ls /usr/share/doc-base/ | wc -l
> 89
>
> In my whole system I have 89 doc-base entries. If I had a lot of installed
> haskell libraries, all of them with a doc-base entry, I'd easily have more
> doc-base entries for haskell libraries than for all other stuff. The same goes
> for perl, python and C. Libraries should not polute doc-base.
>
> * If this is going to be done for all haskell packages, it should be done in
> haskell-devscripts, and not on a per package basis.
>
> This is why I don't use doc-base on my package. I don't like to see it in
> another packages because it's good to have a strong group policy, and packages
> following a standard, so that it's easy to work with all of them after you
> learn the structure of one of them.
>
> What do you think about these points?
They make sense. I agree with them :-).
I'll raise a bug against lintian so that it doesn't test for doc-base for
packages named libghc6-*-doc.
Erik
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/
Reply to: