Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
Hi,
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 06:33:08PM +0100, Samuel Mimram wrote:
>> It would be nice if you could allow the Programming/OCaml section. There
>> are many OCaml libraries in Debian and having all their doc registered
>> in the same section would be useful.
>
> Seconded.
Programming/OCaml is a valid section. Quoting the section 2.3.3 of
doc-base manual:
Programming
IDEs, debuggers, compilers, APIs, libraries, programming languages.
Documentation related to only one specific language should be put in
subsection named like the language, for example:
* C
* C++
* Java
* Perl
* Python
* Ruby
The list contains only examples and is not (and most probably never be)
complete. I can add OCaml to it in the next release.
>
> While we are at it, can the doc-base maintainer please comment on
> whether the sections Programming/Foo are appropriate for library
> documentation automatically generated by some literate programming tool
> (ocamldoc in our case, but more generally also javadoc, pydoc, ...).
Obviously! APIs of language Foo, even automatically generated, should go
to Programming/Foo.
Regards,
robert
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
