> what you MUST do, is download the tarball and see if the maintainer > included any helpfull files to help you understand how to use > the library, one of those helpfull files is test-libglade.c, a full > fledged example of all the uses of libglade.
I haven't been following this thread all too closely, but it seems to me that there are three use cases of a library; One is people who wish to to use a program that requires the library (it's unusual for someone to want to load the library on its own ;) ). This need only be the pre-compiled library, any support files, copyright, etc. Not much in the way of documentation is needed at all, except possibly some errata and notes on how the package differs in configuration and/or installation from that recommended by the author... The next is the case of people wishing to develop software that uses the library. This should have API documentation and examples, pkg-config data, and such. May as well call it a -doc package, because the standard pre-compiled library package should do just fine here too. There generally needn't be any compiled code here. Lastly is the case of people wanting to modify/bugfix/etc. the library itself. If provided as a package, this should probably have at least a version of the library with debugging symbols. But then, those who need this are likely already well-equipped to go download the original source tarball themselves, or even just go direct to CVS. If no package is provided for this case, a short note in the -doc package would be enough to point people at where they can get the full thing. I personally don't think someone should have to go download the entire source tarball for API documentation, including example use code which IS documentation in its own right, after all. Especially since glade is pushing the use of libglade as THE way to incorporate glade-produced layouts into applications, libglade should be packaged so as to encourage just that. Not make it hard for application developers to figure out how to use it. If it were just some random lib that only a handful of people will ever use, then who cares. But that's not really the case with libglade. In any case, this is more an issue for the package maintainer, than the author (assuming, of course, that they're different people). If the author puts out a tarball of everything, then it's the package maintainers job to divide it up appropriately. Anyhow... Just my 0.00000002c worth... :) Fredderic _______________________________________________ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! _______________________________________________ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
