Should we re-organize Qt *-doc-html packages?

[Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer]

El jue., 14 nov. 2019 15:22, Dmitry Shachnev <mitya57 at debian.org> escribió:

> Hi Lisandro!
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 03:12:48PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez
> Meyer wrote:
> > > 1) Should we create new Architecture: all packages (like qt*-doc-dev),
> to
> > > contain the .tags and examples-manifest.xml files?
> > >
> > > 2) If yes, should it contain both these files or only one of them? Also
> > > should we do it for all submodules, or only for those 6 modules listed
> > > above?
> > >
> > > 3) If no, should we make qt*-dev or qt*-examples recommend
> qt*-doc-html?
> > >
> > > Note that if the answer is ‘yes’, then we would need to do from 6 to
> ~30
> > > uploads to NEW. (This is why I lean towards ‘no’.)
> >
> > This is my personal opinion, but feel free to implement whatever you see
> most
> > fit, you are the one doing the job :-)
> >
> > My first approach to this would be:
> >
> > - Creating qt*-dev-doc shipping only the .tags, and just one -dev-doc per
> > submodule. Gotcha in this: if this creates a link in the doc, it should
> also
> > create a strict dependency in the right -doc package... :S
>
> Do you think it should be named -dev-doc or -doc-dev? I prefer the latter,
> because it contains development files for those who want to link to the
> documentation.
>


doc-dev, I misspelled it.


> Also what link do you mean? I do not plan to symlink anything, just split
> the
> file(s) into a separate package.


Applications generating documentation will create a link against qt doc. I
mean, not at the packaging level, but as their final result.


Also I don’t want to make that package depend on the main -doc-html package.
> Because the only benefit of splitting is reducing size of Build-Depends in
> some packages. And this benefit will be lost.
>
> > - Make qt*-examples recommend (or even depend upon) qt*-doc-html. If you
> are
> >   trying to test examples you are probably trying to read the related
> doc too.
>
> Such a dependency is fine for me.
>
> > Of course this would be my first approach, it can be changed upon
> discussion :-)
>
> What is your opinion on question 2)? Should we make such a split in all Qt
> modules, or only where we cannot move the .tags files directly to -dev?
>

The later.

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-kde-talk/attachments/20191117/f2e095f4/attachment.html>