Mailinglist Archive: yast-devel (85 mails)

[Lukas Ocilka <lukas.ocilka@xxxxxxx>]

Michal Svec wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Jiri Srain wrote:
> 
>> We already have eg. the yast2-devel package which contains only documentation 
>> for developers. I'd find it consistent calling the packages this way (eg. 
>> yast2-installatoin-devel in thexample above).
>>
>> I checked with local packagers, there is no rule on how such packages should 
>> be caleld. There are already some -devel-doc packages in autobuild, but they 
>> are just about five.
>>
>> Any other ideas?
> 
> How about removing the auto generated documentation from all packages and 
> put it either to a standalone package or on the web or both?
> 
> Both could be done automatically, from svn or current packages and would 
> save space in current packages and would just need one additional package.

Creating one additional package containing all auto-generated wouldn't
work because that would need to be product-based decision. Some YaST
packages can be part of the CD/DVD installation media but not on FTP
tree or vice versa. BTW: Building an SVN tree is not an easy task...

The documentation needs to be generated during the package-build because
that's the only way to keep in consistent (and sometimes the only way to
get it built).

Putting documentation on web needs a web-synchronization and
documentation of our packages changes as we develop them. YaST
documentation is only created for released products
(http://forgeftp.novell.com/yast/doc/) but we want other developers to
know the FACTORY status as well. Building the whole documentation is
also quite uneasy (I've just built SLES10 SP1 documentation, I know what
I'm talking about :) )

This might be a long discussion about pros and cons.

Lukas