| 1 |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 9:13 AM orbea <orbea@××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Protecting users from themselves can be a misfeature. Its better to |
| 4 |
> educate and then let them freely choose than to play as their nanny. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
TL;DR - it makes sense to unconditionally install prebuilt manpages, |
| 8 |
but not to require pulling in dependencies to build them. The latter |
| 9 |
should be up to maintainer discretion. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I suspect the original policy was more about the fact that install |
| 12 |
masks are already available to cover use cases like avoiding manpages. |
| 13 |
I think the dependency issue is the much bigger one. If the |
| 14 |
dependencies to generate manpages are trivial or can be expected to be |
| 15 |
otherwise installed I can see the argument for just installing them |
| 16 |
anyway. However, when they're large it doesn't make much sense. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
If you're going to go on an expedition to the middle of the wilderness |
| 19 |
where you can't use your phone to google a manpage, then I'd think |
| 20 |
that manpages are probably just one of MANY things you'll be wanting |
| 21 |
to pack. I get that once upon a time people only owned a single |
| 22 |
computer and were concerned about having that one computer down. |
| 23 |
Access to specialized tools could still be something you have to plan |
| 24 |
for today. However, the text of most manpages is easily searched |
| 25 |
online today so missing them is at worst an inconvenience unless you |
| 26 |
literally have no access to a browser on another device. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Rich |
Archives