Stefano Zacchiroli writes: Hi,
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 06:33:08PM +0100, Samuel Mimram wrote: >> It would be nice if you could allow the Programming/OCaml section. There >> are many OCaml libraries in Debian and having all their doc registered >> in the same section would be useful. > > Seconded. Programming/OCaml is a valid section. Quoting the section 2.3.3 of doc-base manual: Programming IDEs, debuggers, compilers, APIs, libraries, programming languages. Documentation related to only one specific language should be put in subsection named like the language, for example: * C * C++ * Java * Perl * Python * Ruby The list contains only examples and is not (and most probably never be) complete. I can add OCaml to it in the next release. > > While we are at it, can the doc-base maintainer please comment on > whether the sections Programming/Foo are appropriate for library > documentation automatically generated by some literate programming tool > (ocamldoc in our case, but more generally also javadoc, pydoc, ...). Obviously! APIs of language Foo, even automatically generated, should go to Programming/Foo. Regards, robert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]