I'm intrigued by the idea of Hackage docs that don't use Haddock. IF you do have better docs, host them somewhere, and put a link prominently in the .cabal file synopsis.
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 9:25 PM, John Millikin <jmilli...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is there any way to indicate to Hackage that it should not try to generate > Haddock documentation? I'm concerned for two use cases for packages using a > different docs system: > > 1) A user might see the commentless auto-generated haddock and believe the > package is undocumented. > 2) A user might find the haddock through Google, and not realize there's > real documentation available elsewhere. > > Purposfully causing Hackage's haddock step to fail will mark the package as > a "build failure", which gives a bad impression to potential users. > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
