Re: Lists of recommended doc-base sections
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 02:43:58PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Hello Debian-policy,
>
> Is there a list of recommended section document for doc-base
> files ?
>
> Specifically, we have packages with both Apps/Math and Math,
> and both Apps/Text and Text.
>
> Which one should be preferred for consistency ?
>
> Also, lintian could include better check for doc-base files:
> /dwww/menu/errors.html show a lot of errors on my box.
>
> It would be really nice if someone made quality check similar to
> those I do for menu.
It'd be nice if someone revived the doc-base project -- last upload
March 2003, and the maintainer hasn't been heard of since a while.
In /usr/share/doc/doc-base/doc-base.html you can find a manual about
doc-base, but it's a bit outdated, for example, it doesn't discuss that
debhelper has doc-base support.
But more importantly, how is the doc-base support from the
documentation-programs point of view at the moment? Do they all support
doc-base now? Which GUI program can I launce to see an overview of all
doc-base registered documentation on my system?
I agree doc-base is a good idea, and that syntax checks should be added
to lintian, for example, but before I want to prod maintainers about
issues like this, I'd like to know a bit about the level of support. As
a datapoint, I haven't up until now took the effort to write doc-base
files for my packages, since I didn't see in any way any advantage in
it, and the whole concept was a bit vague to me.
Of course there is a little bit a chicken-egg issue going on here, but
adding doc-base support to documentation-managing programs is a lot
easier than making all thousands of packages properly provide doc-base
files.
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Reply to: