Lucas Nussbaum dijo [Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:23:40AM +0100]: > > > But then, it would severely limit the possibilities for overrides, and > > > we would end up basically reimplementing debhelper. > > > > > > > I suppose it does get redundant with dh_installdocs. What if > > dh-make-ruby just added a directory to the .docs file and then dh_ruby > > will copy the docs into that directory? > > > > As far as overrides, that seems rather simple to me. > > > > dh_ruby --ignore-doc=x --ignore-file=y > > That could work. But, I don't see any advantage compared to the current > behaviour (have dh-make-ruby create the .docs file at src pkg generation > time, and then use dh_installdocs at build time). The current behaviour > has the advantage of using the standard way of controlling the > installation of those files, and thus makes the learning curve for > current Debian packagers easier.
Without yet even checking your work (but from what I read on this thread, it looks very promising!), I lean towards leaving dh_ruby as minimal as possible, making it better integrate with the rest of the dh tools - Installing documentation in its place is dh_installdocs' job. Of course, it would be dh_ruby's to generate a suitable documentation format from the package sources, ready to be just copied to its destination directory. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ruby-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110118181154.gh30...@gwolf.org
