[arch-dev-public] OMG info pages
eliott at cactuswax.net
Thu Apr 24 15:37:14 EDT 2008
On 4/24/08, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Jan de Groot <jan at jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
> > What do we do with gtk-doc documentation? They're very useful when
> > developing software, but they take a shitload of space compared to the
> > libraries and include files shipped with a library like glib2. Before we
> > stripped these docs, glib2 would take >50MB, now with stripped docs,
> > it's 8-9MB in size.
> > I always defended the removal of gtk-doc API documentation as "we don't
> > ship docs by policy". If we change this policy, I have no serious
> > defense against keeping these docs any longer, which means gtk-doc API
> > documentation will get included, meaning a base package like glib2 will
> > grow to 50MB again.
> Hey Jan,
> I just want to make sure you're ok with this, because you're the
> hardest hit. I am thinking that stripping gtk-docs and things of that
> nature is perfectly acceptable. I would defend it with "they're too
> big and it's my freaking package". Let me know if you have any qualms
> Keep in mind, I'm really thinking of JUST info pages here - there are
> a lot of GNU tools that document all their stuff in info pages - I'm
> not too concerned about HTML documentation that's pretty much only
> usable in a desktop-environment (read: you can just browse it online)
Maybe something like.. including info pages in 'core' packages only,
as some info pages for core utils might be required to get a box
online or up and running (like grub for instance).
I honestly don't know what people request info pages for with regularity...
But making a policy distinction such as 'core packages only' would
provide clarity to end users (they wouldn't have to guess what has
info and what doesnt), as well as make it easier for packages to just
get their work done.
More information about the arch-dev-public