So should this.. -- Mike Gratton <mike@vee.net> Leader in leachate production and transmission since 1976. <http://web.vee.net/>
--- Begin Message ---
- To: "Kevin A. Burton" <burton@openprivacy.org>
- Subject: Re: policy proposition for javadoc installation
- From: Mike Gratton <mike@vee.net>
- Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 08:26:53 +1030
- Message-id: <3BE5B9A5.1050409@vee.net>
- References: <[🔎] 20011103140437.1D61649F5@silbermann.snv.jussieu.fr> <[🔎] 87lmhnwy5f.fsf@orcus.priv.at> <[🔎] 874roa1cmi.fsf@universe.yi.org>
Kevin A. Burton wrote:Um, why would I want to distinguish api documentation from "other" documentation?Because most people won't care about API documentation. If I want to download and use KOffice I obviously don't care about API documentation.Well, no one is forcing end users to look at any javadoc in the package's directory in /usr/share/doc. If it is a subdirectory of that, it is very unobtrusive.Anyway, for end-user packages, I would have though that installing the javadoc for it should be optional, perhaps included in the -dev version of the package anyway. Ditto for libs, end users don't want to waste space if they are never going to develop adainst it, so put the javadoc in a separate -dev version of the package.Mike. -- Mike Gratton <mike@vee.net> "Every motive escalate." Blatant self-promotion: <http://web.vee.net/>
--- End Message ---