A policy on how to choose the installed documentation formats.

  • Open
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
2 participants
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • ng0
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
ng0
Severity
minor
N
(name . GUIX Bugs)(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
87zip23vwj.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is
I don't think we have what this thread talks about covered in the
manual.

If we do have though, consider this bug obsolete.


Toggle quote (5 lines)
> > Info > HTML > man > txt > PDF > PS ?

> Roughly, yes.


Not the same message, but in the thread:

Toggle quote (16 lines)
> What about installing only HTML?
>
> I find that HTML (and Info, and man) is more convenient to read on-line
> than PDFs. We rarely include PDF documentation in packages.
>
> Of course, avoiding PDF/PS/DVI allows us to remove the dependency
> on TeX Live. Last, from discussions I heard at the Reproducible
> Build Summit, I think DVIs and maybe PS/PDFs are not
> bit-reproducible out-of-the-box.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Maybe we should have a policy on how to choose the installed
> documentation formats.
>
> Ludo’.
--
♥? ng0
For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 11 Jan 2017 23:14
control message for bug #24099
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
87shoputva.fsf@gnu.org
severity 24099 minor
?
Your comment

Commenting via the web interface is currently disabled.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 24099@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 24099
Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)
mumi am -- -s
Or, compose a reply to this issue
mumi compose
Or, send patches to this issue
mumi send-email *.patch