Re: What about the texi/html policy-project ?
Santiago Vila Doncel writes:
> Yann Dirson wrote:
> > I remember there once was some discussion about whether/where to
> > install HTML docs created from .texi files. If I remember well, we
> > mostly agreed that we should install them in a subdirectory of the
> > package's doc dir, but nobody took a decision about how it should be
> > named. And nothing was made policy.
> >
> > What's the current status of this ?
>
> We agreed that all packages should support a new `doc-base' package
> which would generate .info, .html, .dvi or .ps on demand.
Yes and no: I also remember that there were objections for this
on-demand generation, for machines with low resources (eg. 386). I
don't remember seing a consensus about that, at least.
What I remember is that someone proposed to come with a doc-base, so
that we'll be able to judge from a sample implementation.
> [ Of course, I would propose to postpone this for Debian 2.1 ]
Yes, doc-base should probably wait for 2.1 now.
But we could still make policy right now on the location of HTML'd
texi files. Even if deity is not ready right now, I think it would be
a good thing to have already a consistent doc layout when
part-of-package-exclusions will be available.
We already have a policy on where to put manpages and info files. I
think having right now a policy for placing HTML and texi-HTML files
should be a good thing.
--
Yann Dirson <ydirson@a2points.com> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email: <dirson@univ-mlv.fr> | support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email: <dirson@debian.org> | more powerful, more stable !
http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 |
-----------------------------------------
A computer engineer's looking for a job !
-----------------------------------------
Reply to: