On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 10:46 +0200, Thomas Spura wrote: > On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 11:03:46 +0300 > Jonathan Dieter wrote: > > > On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 06:27 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > > > On 5 August 2010 21:49, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Yaah -- so if it's useful documentation, then I'd be against > > > > creating a rule that bans it. The next question would be whether > > > > it's useful or not.... Public vs private certainly sounds like > > > > one thing to look at. However, some libraries might want to ship > > > > information about their private interfaces for people who want to > > > > help hack on the library so it's not a 100% thing that I'd want > > > > to enforce with a Guideline.... > > > > > > > > Perhaps in these two specific cases it would be best to open bugs > > > > for the maintainers to look at whether some of the documentation > > > > in here isn't considered useful and could be left out. > > > > > > I have to agree with Toshio here - it would be a bad move to be > > > banning sub-packaged docs. In the case of root I can say that the > > > root docs sub-package is very useful. > > > > Sigh. No one is suggesting banning sub-packaged docs. I find them > > quite useful myself. My suggestion was to limit the size of > > automatically generated documentation. However, the feedback I'm > > getting seems to suggest that a number of people disagree with me. :) > > > > I've taken a look at the root source rpm, and it looks like root-doc > > is generated by root itself *after* root has been completely built > > (rather than as part of root's build process). > > > > I've opened a bug, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621812 > > suggesting that the documentation generation be moved even later, into > > the %post section of the root-doc install. This means the > > documentation will be generated on the user's machine, eliminating > > the need for a massive download. > > No, please not... > Generating that documentation will take ages, so each time, %post needs > at least 45 min - 1 hour to complete... > (One of my reasons for switching to Fedora from Gentoo, was exactly > that amount of updating time. ;-) ) According to http://root.cern.ch/root/Documentation.html , it will only regenerate changed or added documentation, so it should only take a long time on the first install (I haven't done it, so I'm assuming your 45 min - 1 hour is accurate). > How about writing a little shell script and include that in the doc > subpackage, so if a user wants to see documentation, they can run the > snipped and wait for the run, as they wish? > > Currently, when building root, it's done the same: > """ > # Generate documentation > echo Rint.Includes: 0 > .rootrc > sed "s!@PWD@!${PWD}!g" %{SOURCE2} > html.C > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=${PWD}/lib:${PWD}/cint/cint/include:${PWD}/cint/cint/stl > \ ROOTSYS=${PWD} ./bin/root.exe -l -b -q html.C > rm .rootrc > mv htmldoc ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-%{version}/html > """ > > Maybe putting that (except the mv in the end) in a snipped, would give > the user htmldoc in the current folder, where the user called it... Sounds great. Honestly, I don't really mind which way it works. Jonathan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
