> Cc: [email protected] > From: Per Bothner <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 10:35:39 -0800 > > > I think it should use BAR.png. The problem with file-name clashes is > > not unique to images, it exists with the Info files as well. It's for > > the package maintainers to solve, I see no need for the Texinfo > > package to second-guess its users. > > Which "package maintainers"? > > Say I maintain package FOO1 (say kawa), and someone else maintains > package FOO2 (say emacs), and have (different) file named screenshot-1.png. > What happens when FOO1.info and FOO2.info and installed in the same > info installation directory? Bad things? Who did something wrong? > Nobody.
How is this different from the Info files themselves? It isn't. > How do we avoid this problem? By using a naming convention. Exactly. > An alternative would be to use separate directories. That would perhaps > make most sense for html: > > FOO1/ > index.html > Introduction-to-Foo1.html > ToC.html > screenshot1.png > screenshot2.png This is already used with HTML, but only if the HTML output is split by chapters or sections. If you produce a single monolithic HTML output file, it doesn't have subdirectories, AFAIR. > I've started writing up a roadmap / design document for replacing texinfo's > info-centric model with an html-centric mode for documentation. > I'm ok with deferring the issue until then. Like I said, I don't speak for the Texinfo project, so if Gavin is okay with your suggestions, go ahead and ignore me. I just think that making the Texinfo system overly complicated for these and similar reasons will end up replacing one problem for another.
