[Numpy-discussion] missing doc dir in the official tarball

Pauli Virtanen pav@iki...
Sun Dec 21 06:49:37 CST 2008


Sun, 21 Dec 2008 13:05:57 +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 3:02 PM, Pauli Virtanen <pav@iki.fi> wrote:
>> Sat, 20 Dec 2008 20:15:43 +0900, David Cournapeau wrote:
>>> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Ondrej Certik <ondrej@certik.cz>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Just to make it clear -- I think the docs should not be generated in
>>>> the tarball -- only the sources should be there.
>>>
>>> I agree this makes more sense for you, as a packager, but I am not
>>> sure it makes much sense to put the doc sources in the tarball for
>>> users (Building numpy should only require python + a C compiler;
>>> building the doc is more difficult  -you need at least sphinx and all
>>> its dependencies).
>>>
>>> For audiolab, I put the generated doc, thinking if people want to mess
>>> with the doc, they are knowledgeable enough to deal with svn - but I
>>> did not think about the packagers :) I am not sure what's the best
>>> solution: maybe put both in the (released) source tarball ?
>>
>> I'd say that we put the source for the documentation to the
>> documentation tarball, and distribute the built HTML+whatever
>> documentation in a separate package.
> 
> Why not to just include the *sources* together with numpy, and possibly
> include html+whatever in a separate documentation package?

That's what I tried to say, but mistyped "source" as "documentation".

-- 
Pauli Virtanen



More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list