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

Re: english version of the o'reilly OCaml book



On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 10:07:04PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 03:30:58PM +0200, Sven wrote:
> > A ok, so please ignore the other message i sent about it, i should have
> > guessed you did already know aboutit, since we read the same mailing lists
> > :)))
> 
> Ok ;)
> 
> > That said, maybe you should create a new package called ocaml-book-en and
> > ocaml-book-fr or something such ?
> 
> Sure, I've already thought about add a new binary package ocaml-book
> generated, along with ocaml-book-fr, from the source package ocaml-book.
> I thought to avoid the "-en" at the end of the package name because is a
> standard practice to have english "things" as a plain name and other
> "things" qualified with a country identifier.
> Anyway I accept suggestions ...

How, well, ...

i would keep the -en, it would be more logical, but then, you choose. (and
have ocaml-book be the same package, and have it provide ocaml-book-fr, or
something such to ease the transition :)))).

> > What is the size of those packages anyway ? 
> 
> Well the current ocaml-book-fr deb package is 1 Mb and occupies 5 Mb
> when installed. The PDF version of the english translation is 2.8 Mb.
> 
> I am not sure on what to package as the english translation, the
> available formats are PDF, HTML, and another one I don't remember,
> probably a PostScript.

Did you ask the translators ? Would it be possible to get access to the true
upstream source, and build whatever format you like from that, eventually
splitting them in many different binary packages ?

> I'am thinking about packaging only the PDF version (if it is a PDF that
> enables text selection) or the HTML version otherwise. Another advantae
> of PDF is that is usually more compact because HTML version can't be
> installed compressed.

Mmm, i don't know, usually postscript is easier to print (at least for high
end printers we have here), and since there was an issue about acroread
lately, maybe it would not do to keep only pdf as format (i think only
acroread can do the navigation stuff, and it is non-free, and maybe not even
that). Also i think html would be a real nice solution also, especially if it
is included in the doc-book stuff.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


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



Reply to: