Hello Laurie and Jan, Jan Stary wrote on Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 05:41:55PM +0200: > Laurie wrote: >> Jan wrote: >>> Laurie wrote:
>>>> Attached is a new port of DRC [1], which can generate audio room >>>> correction filters. It has a quirky build, but is _very_ effective at >>>> its job once you work out how to use it. >>> Why don't you include the manual? >> Good question. The manual is a smidgen under 30MiB because of all the >> figures, which felt rather heavyweight to me. I don't feel strongly about >> this, so if folk think it should be included, I'm happy to do so! > sorry, I didn't realize that: 84% of the source dir is doc/figures/ > Is there a general rule for such ports? Not just in ports, but in general, i would comment that software without documentation is next to useless. While having only HTML documentation and no manual page is certainly not good, having HTML documentation below /usr/local/share/doc/ is certainly better than no documentation at all. Given that Laurie mentioned in his original message that working out how to use DRC is non-trivial, this might apply here even more than on average. Documentation having a size of 35 MB is certainly not good, and on first sight, this particular documentation doesn't appear to be well-organized, but it does look like it contains a lot of information, so if you are willing to search your way through it, it is probably worth having. Again, poor and messy documentation is better than none at all. Provided that a port is useful and maintainable, which i cannot judge in this case - is it abandonware? maybe even dangerous abandonware? or does it just work and needs little maintenance? - then i don't think 35 MB of (uncompressed) docs are a problem. Large numbers of ports exist that create much larger packages. > Make a separate drc-doc seems a bit overkill. No, don't make separate -doc[s] packages on OpenBSD, except in extremely unusual cases, for example when a package comes in flavors for different language versions that all share the same documentation, in which case the main packages should RUN_DEPENDS on the documentation package, like in lang/fennel. Another exception may be unusually excessive size, like the 500 MB (compressed!) in lilypond-docs or the 2 GB (compessed) in texlive_texmf-docs. Probably, some existing examples are bad ideas, for example these look suspicious, and i don't immediately see why they should be split out: OpenEXR-doc, drgeo-doc, gnucash-docs, samba-docs, xmlsec-docs Yours, Ingo > Also note that drc hasn't been touched since 2019 > and provides its own getopt (a copy of the GNU getopt of 1997).
