On 07/23/19 09:02, Jaco Kroon wrote:
> Hi Michał,
> On 2019/07/23 14:39, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Wed, 2019-07-24 at 00:17 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
>>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 13:38:28 +0200
>>> Gerion Entrup <gerion.ent...@flump.de> wrote:
>>>> What about a compromise?:
>>>> Deliver a (prebuild) manpage as package maintainer by default, but keep
>>>> a use flag "man-build" (or whatever) that builds the man page for
>>>> everyone
>>>> (also the maintainer herself)  with use of the crazy extra deps. So
>>>> a user can
>>>> do (incomplete) version bumps and gets a manpage and the maintainer
>>>> gets the prebuild manpage in a defined way.
>>> You're missing the part where the maintainer is, by the policy,
>>> required to, for every bump:
>>> 1. Ensure the generated documentation is extracted from the build
>>> 2. Packaged into a tarball somewhere
>>> 3. Uploaded to a server that can host that tarball
>>> 4. Update the package to use that.
>>> Failure to do this will mean you're shipping out-dated documentation to
>>> the user.
>> I fail to see how this could happen, unless you'd be using terrible
>> hacks.
> And therein lies the issue.  We would.
>>> This series of back-flips is just not practical at present, and
>>> introduces more steps where mistakes can break the ebuild.
>>  From this thread, it seems that most devs find it impractical to even
>> test their ebuilds.
> No.  They've been saying that the overhead of maintaining the above
> mentioned terrible hacks is unacceptable.  Imagine this:
> In order to build man pages I need to pull in 20 additional packages. 
> So when I roll new ebuild, I need those 20 ... not an issue for me, so
> now I need to build the man pages, and I need to create a tarball with
> those.  A tarball which won't exist at the time when I initially build,
> so it's not available to generate a Manifest.  So first I have to avoid
> those from SRC_URI completely.  Then once I've deployed the pre-built
> manpages, I need to re-add it.
> So every time there is an upstream version bump, this needs to be
> rechecked and determined whether the manpages also needs to be bumped,
> or I need to bump unconditionally.  More overhead.
> This is outright annoying.  Unless it can be automated properly. And I
> believe it might be possible, but it'll involve yet more base complexity
> by adding build-time dependencies to build man pages to a separate
> depend (or at least flag them with a USE=buildman flag), somehow portage
> would need to first sort out the building and deployment of the separate
> SRC_URI for man pages before adding to the Manifest.  You get where I'm
> going I hope.
> Everybody agrees with your base premise:  It's ideal to ship (optional)
> documentation along with every single package, especially if it doesn't
> have to pull in a boatload of dependencies.
As an apparently noncorporeal being, I am curious as to why the opinions
of other apparently noncorporeal beings [1] are not valued. Further, I
would like to remind you that shipping documentation by default does not
necessarily imply forcing workarounds to avoid optional documentation,
while the proposal in question explicitly would.


> Kind Regards,
> Jaco

Reply via email to