Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Paweł Hajdan
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] USE=doc for .pdf's ? (WAS: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sci-astronomy/kapteyn: metadata.xml ChangeLog kapteyn-1.9.2.ebuild)
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:43:25
Message-Id: 4C3CC1D5.4010401@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] USE=doc for .pdf's ? (WAS: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sci-astronomy/kapteyn: metadata.xml ChangeLog kapteyn-1.9.2.ebuild) by Jeremy Olexa
On 7/13/10 12:32 PM, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:25:51 +0000 (UTC), "Kacper Kowalik (xarthisius)" > <xarthisius@g.o> wrote: > >> if use doc; then >> insinto /usr/share/doc/${PF} >> doins doc/*.pdf || die > > An open question to all: > > Should we be hiding pdf's behind USE=doc?? I've seen it here and there > as of late. I thought USE=doc was for compiling docs and/or pulling in > extra deps to build docs.
In my opinion we're never going to have 100% consistency here. I'd say let everybody implement it in a way one thinks is the best. The description of the flag is "Adds extra documentation (API, Javadoc, etc)". So if something is an extra documentation, it seems to be fine to "hide" it behind USE=doc. And I'd prefer to keep the meaning of "extra documentation" flexible and open to interpretation, just because there is no obvious benefit to aim for 100% consistency here, and overstandardization would be bad. Paweł

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies