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

Re: Proposed new initiative: include HTML documentation



Hi Caitlin,

First of all, thanks for all the effort you have been putting in the
Ruby packages. It is really appreciated, and you already a valuable
member of our team. :)

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 03:29:48PM -0400, Caitlin Matos wrote:
> I would like some feedback as to whether this is a worthwhile initiative
> and/or other ideas. Please discuss over the mailing list, or during the Ruby
> BoF on Friday.

To be very honest, I don't think we should do that. I have 3 issues with
it:

0) adding a -doc package for each source package will add a burden to too many
people. This will use:

- time from 1 person to update the packaging
- maybe time from 1 person to review and upload (in the case of
  sponsored uploads)
- time from 1 ftp-master to accept the upload (due to the new binary
  package)

1) adding a -doc package for each source package will clutter the
archive unnecessarily in my POV.

2) the HTML documentation produced by rdoc (or yard, for that matter) is
too big.  I just tried building rake from git, and the and the -doc
package has a bunch of stuff (fonts, js files etc, images) that will
probably be duplicated in every other -doc package.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related to 1) and 2): Perl packages include documentation (manpages) in
the main package and that hasn't been a problem because the format is
sane, doesn't waste space and don't duplicate stuff across packages.

I think we should not add -doc packages, and before we even think about
including documentation in Ruby packages, we need to find a solution for
size issue.

Another alternative would be to work on something that would work for
all packages at once. For example, we could have a service that would
generate documentation from all source packages, and then a single
package in Debian that would download documentation for all installed
packages (think something similar to apt-file) for offline usage, plus
an option for building/installing documentation from local source
packages.

-- 
Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: