[arch-dev-public] OMG info pages

eliott eliott at cactuswax.net
Tue Apr 22 14:35:16 EDT 2008


On 4/22/08, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Travis Willard <travis at archlinux.org> wrote:
>  >  > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  >  > I'm really really sick of people making mountains out of the docs
>  >  >  >  molehill... it's such a petty issue...
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  Would anyone honestly care if we removed the !docs option from
>  >  >  >  makepkg.conf by default, and let each maintainer add options=(!docs)
>  >  >  >  if the docs are too big for a given package?
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  No need to do the rebuilds all in one go, just let the docs trickle in...
>  >  >  >
>  >  >  >  Opinions anyone?
>  >  >
>  >  >  I was about to suggest the same thing.
>  >
>  >  Arch prefers manpages, there is no doubt there. We also prefer vanilla
>  >  packages, which could very well include packaging and installing
>  >  upstream documentation as the authors intended. I'm fine with keeping
>  >  docs around.
>
>  Yeah, let me be fully clear here. The first email comes off as though
>  I am saying "People are complaining, let us fix it". That is close to
>  the truth but not exactly it.
>
>  The doc thing always sat oddly with me. We prefer vanilla packages,
>  but we remove some crap FROM these vanilla packages. That seems
>  counter-intuitive to me. Vanilla packages are vanilla, not modified to
>  suit some internal opinions. If we want to provide the fullest
>  "framework" of a distro, we shouldn't rampantly remove stuff that some
>  people may find useful in a base system

I was certainly resistant to the idea at first, as your original email
did sound like 'I am doing it because I got tired of hearing people
complain'. That isn't a good reason to me, as there will always be
people complaining about something.

However, since you provided a sound technical reason, and clarified
your position (thanks for that by the way), I have no problem with it.




More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list