Hey gang; O.K.....this discussion has gone on long enough IMnsHO.
And it was redundant BEFORE it got started last week or so. How so you may choose to ask ? It has already been discussed at least two times in the past couple of years or so. And NOTHING has changed accept the names of the folks whining. Bottom line: Judd does not like docs being part of a package UNLESS they are help files required by a gui-based app., man pages, or not available anywhere else (including the web). This is also VERY old news for arch, going back to its' inception. It remains a hard and fast declaration of how this distro will work. Have a nice day. And very best regards; Bob Finch > A) Regarding documentation: > Hey.. why not try this: > > 1) alter makepkg to create a second <pkgname>-docs package if there are > any docs [includes /usr/share/doc and info pages (i badly need these for > a lot of programs when offline)] > > 2) create a separate "docs" repository which has just these document > packages (these packages have no dependencies on anything, so no > hastle maintaining them) > > 3) The transition to these stuff can go on slowly.. meaning start off > now, so that all future packages will have docs, dont worry about > older packages until a rebuild is necessary for some other purpose. > > Thus we can endup with an elegant solution pleasing ppl who want > documentation(*shouts me me me!*) and ppl who dont care about docs. > > (disclaimer: i dunno if anyone has suggested this.. but i just got this > as a brainwave this morning :D ) > > > B) Regarding pacman normal features, i request some option to allow > "automatic downgrading" as i had explained in one of my previous > threads. > > > Best Regards to the arch team. > > -- > Vinay S Shastry _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
