magnus:
Matthew William Cox wrote:
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 12:07:35PM +0100, Magnus Therning wrote:
I think it'd be worthwhile to provide packages with haddock-generated documentation for all haskell packages. However, I'm not convinced that the docs should be packaged with the binary components of the package.
Generally, Arch users expect docs to come with the package as provided by upstream, and not as some separate package.
Historically Arch stripped docs out of the packages, but that policy was reversed over a year ago. See the hue and cry over here: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2008-April/005574.html
All right. Then I'll instead try to modify cabal2arch to build docs as well.
The one thing that I _really_ want input on is the location of the docs
- GHC ships with docs located in /usr/share/doc/ghc/libraries/ - In that directory there's also a script (gen_contents_index) that will rebuild the index of all haddock docs located in subdirectories (it searches for */*.haddock).
So, is that location an acceptable location for docs of other haskell packages?
If you can come up with a policy-compliant doc patch, I'm happy to proceed with that. Go for it! -- Don