[pacman-dev] makepkg patch to create $pkgname-docs package for docs

[Roman Kyrylych]

2007/4/24, Scott Horowitz <stonecrest at gmail.com>:
> On 4/24/07, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Nah, stripping docs after downloading them is ...mm ...not good. ;-)
> > I was long-time supporter for splitted packages though (-dev, -doc
> > etc., you can see my comments about that idea in some bugreports).
>
> I disagree strongly, but you probably already knew that ;) It seems
> ridiculous to me to have packages with just docs. What happened to
> KISS? I guarantee that the vast majority of users will either want all
> docs or want no docs, not some in between on a per-package basis.
> Having vanilla arch packages built with docs and allowing people to
> specify in their pacman.conf if they want them stripped is very
> logical.

I don't mind i.e. having php-docs merged into php package. :-)
I just don't think stripping docs after downloading is really useful,
because disk space is much cheaper than traffic cost and time. ;-)
Using the same logic I could think about the option to strip *.h and
*.a after downloading, because I don't compile anything on my server
so I don't need them.
Neither stripping docs nor *.h & *.a helps much _after_downloading_
becase (see above).

The reason that we have -doc packages is that there was demand for
some of them but since Arch doesn't ship docs - separate packages were
created by people who wanted them.
Now, include those docs in main package or still provide separate docs
- not big deal IMO.

-- 
Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)