Re: [Fink-devel] libgettext package layout

[Daniel J. <dan...@gm...>]

On Oct 30, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:

> With a new libgettext suite in the works, I'm wondering about getting
> a saner package layout for this lib suite. Here's (1) the current
> breakdown (gettext3; older gettext appears same):
>
> gettext-doc
>  html-format documentation about library and runtime programs
> gettext-bin
>  runtime programs
>  man-format documentation about library and runtime programs*
> libgettext3-dev
>  library developer files
>
> The * is the crazy part. If we have a separate -doc component, that's
> where the docs should be. If we have separate library and runtime
> components, docs specifically for one should not be in the other. So
> (2) should all doc formats be in the -doc component, or (3) should the
> -doc component be abolished and the docs placed in the actual
> component (-bin or -dev) to which they relate?
>
> I think the -doc (even with added material from -bin) is on the order
> of 100K. Is that large enough (or docs useless enough:) that it should
> be offloaded from the main packages rather than being installed
> automatically (idea 2)? Since the lib has different versions and the
> major-version of -bin need not match that of the -dev installed, is it
> needlessly confusing to have an additional -doc that tries to unify
> the docs for two separate pkgs (the docs one reads may not apply to
> the target presently installed)? I'm thinking separate docs for
> independent items, and so abolishing the -dev (idea 3). Or are we best
> just ignoring this since inertia of things that aren't badly/visibly
> broken avoids having to play any games with upgrade routes, Replaces,
> etc. (idea 1)?

I think (3) makes the most sense, but I'm fine with inertia as an  
excuse. :) I doubt anyone actually uses the docs.

Daniel