Bastien <[email protected]> writes: >> In addition, it is probably a good idea to auto-generate worg/doc.org >> during publishing. > > I updated eldo.el to use the correct repos URLs, along with other minor > fixes and I regenerated the publication of doc.org. > > We can auto-generate worg/doc.org during Worg publishing, I have the > start of a patch for that, but I'm really unsure whether doc.org is that > useful. It feels redundant with the Org manuals indices or with the code > itself.
It is definitely not redundant with the Org manuals - manuals do not include every single option. Of course, it is redundant with the code itself, but I view it similar to auto-generated documentation like spinx in python. > My guess is that nobody really reads it, and the the usefulness of this > file lies in the fact that search engines can index it... is it enough > to justify a (complex) publication task run every few hours? > > Or maybe I'm wrong and people read doc.html. But there was no complaint > that the file was outdated for very long. I recall one complain about that file being out of date. (off list) > I suggest to simply remove it, along with the whole eldo.el machinery. > > WDYT? I think it can be valuable for some users, as a companion to the manual. The key question is how hard would it be to maintain the page generator code. If not too hard, I think it is worth keeping it. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
