[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: "doc" option
Julio Merino <jmmv%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:
> On 11/26/10 6:07 PM, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
>> Unless anyone objects in a week, I'll start adding "doc" option to packages
>> I'm interested to be stripped of installed documentation. First positions
>> in the queue are occupied by modular X.org packages. I'm not going to change
>> current state, default will be to install documentation.
> What's the reason for this? Adding this as an option will only
> make packages a nightmare to maintain. And this option will
> make binary packages obscure because one won't be able to tell
> whether the binary package includes documentation or not.
> I understand the willingness to have this for some packages
> (where the documentation is either huge or license-incompatible
> with the code), but in these cases the documentation should be a
> separate package and not an option. Making this a general
> option is potentially harmful for our users and for the
I don't see how it makes packages harder to maintain,
some options are supported better than others already,
and nobody seems to have problems with that.
It is the lack of this option that causes headache to those who have needs
to install packages without documentation a nightmare, one has to maintain
personal copy of all interesting packages or consider non-pkgsrc ways to
maintain software installation.
I think that we can advertise "doc" option as experimental for some time,
if that matters. This is a kind of improvement, and we may expect that users
understand experimental status.
Main Index |
Thread Index |