Re: Policy ready to be edited
Quoting Sylvain LE GALL <sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org>:
> > It think that this is an upstream problem. If mli files lack
> > ocamldoc documentation, they may be written and sent upstream
> > along with the makefile improvement for documentation generation.
> > (I've already asked you about this in ocaml camp private mail
> > with no reply).
>
> I remember to have replied... But i could be in error.
>
> I agree that upstream should comment the mli in order to have enough
> info... But generating the doc corresponding to it, really should be a
> packager responsability. If we can provide only one .odoc to generate
Generating documentation, do you mean 'make doc'?
> all the documentation, it is far more better than generating HTML,
> man... documentation : it saves space in .deb and times on compile time.
Why don't we compile ocaml files at install time? It would save space
in debs, wouldn't it?
> To my mind it will made user really more comfortable to have a HTML page
> with all the exported function of a library ( even if there is no other
> comment ). For example, i still need to generate lablgtk ocamldoc
> documentation from mli... If something could do it automatically it
> would save me a lot of time...
AFAIK, ocamlbrowse does this already (interface to ocaml interfaces).
--
Jérôme Marant
Reply to: