Re: coq-doc package
On Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 10:14:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 10:00:34AM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 12:14:46PM +0200, Samuel Mimram wrote:
> >
> > > BTW it would be nice to have coq-doc updated too. I'm going to see with
> > > the maintainer (who does not seem to be in d-o-m) if some packages are
> > > planned.
> >
> > The maintainer of the coq-doc package is the Judicaël Courant, the
> > former maintainer of the coq package (formerly sponsored by me).
> > Unfortunately, Judicaël has gone AWOL. Samuel, please go ahead and
> > take the coq-doc package over.
> >
> > However, I am not convinced that packaging postscript documentation
> > (as it is done with the current version of the package) is really
> > useful. You might consider packaging an html version instead.
>
> I think it is usefull. But packaging html stuff too would be nice. We have
> until tomorrow only anyway, so i think cosmetic changes would have to wait for
> later.
If you decide to keep the ps documentation then please consider
splitting into two separate packages (like doc-ps and doc-html)
-Ralf.
--
Reply to: