On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 11:21 -0600, Tommy Reynolds wrote: > Uttered Patrick Barnes <nman64@xxxxxxxxx>, spake thus: > > > +1 on the package type. Location would be /usr/src/redhat. The full > > name might be something like 'fedora-doc-install-guide-devel.src.rpm'. > > Dude! Thanks for the magic word "-devel"! I don't know why I didn't > think of that from the first. That was the missing piece, at least > for now ;-) > > I'm thinking of these RPM's: > > <foo>-<version>.src.rpm Raw CVS dump, w/o CVS subdirs > <foo>-devel-<version>.noarch.rpm Everything in CVS w/corrected paths > <foo>-<lang>-<version>.noarch.rpm XML, XSL, images and desktop files > > The .src RPM is for archiving purposes, I guess. Umm... Methinks this is kind of missing the point of the .src.rpm. That is the source for building; no -devel package containing more of the same is needed, certainly not on a per-doc basis (see below). The original DocBook XML source is in the .src.rpm, probably duplicated again in the normal .noarch.rpm because yelp uses DocBook XML directly. Why triplicate this? The only thing that should be needed for building is "fedora-doc-common-<ver>.noarch.rpm" (or just call it "fedora-doc-devel-<ver>.noarch.rpm"), which would contain user scripts and helpers equivalent to what's in CVS (probably just relocating, as mentioned above). Doesn't matter whether its "-common" or "-devel," as long as it fulfills certain criteria: - Puts common entities, images, stylesheets and so forth in a place where they are available not just for the user building docs, but also where they can be accessed for use in yelp, khelpcenter, etc. - Includes scripts that allow documents to be built from XML source already written to /usr/share/fedora/doc/ (or wherever is referenced in /usr/share/omf/<docname>/<locale> as part of fedora-doc-<lang>-<ver>.noarch.rpm - Proper Requires: on any stuff we're currently using (e.g. xmlformat) that needs to also be in Extras or Core If we need to change scripts, Makefiles, and such to make them universally adaptable not just in CVS but in their packaged form, let's do that. Better that than having to maintain two sets of scripts and build environments. Is there a good reason *not* to do so (you know, other than "gee, that sounds hard")? > The -devel RPM is for folk wishing to use the FDP infrastructure but > not using the CVS facilities. I'm not sure where the -devel files > should go, but maybe a "pkg-config" crutch would fix this. There's really no reason they couldn't live in /usr/share/fedora/ somwhere, which is the right place for them given the namespacing the rest of the Fedora Project is using. > The <lang> RPM would hold the XML infrastructure to allow desktop > tools like yelp to work. Right, which is why a separate -devel per doc is probably not that useful. With a proper extra doc on "How to Build Docs," itself included in yelp/khelpcenter as part of the fedora-doc-[common|devel] package, people should be able to "fedoradoc-make" a doc, or something like that, to build things we've included, or their own docs. Perhaps such a helper would also include relevant checks for project standards. > Hmm... I'll think about this a bit more. > > Thanks! I realized that having a <lang> RPM implies we should have separate <lang> .desktop files for each package. Just a note for the archive for later... -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list