On 3 October 2013 10:52, Gary V. Vaughan <g...@vaughan.pe> wrote: > Hi Hisham, > > On Oct 3, 2013, at 8:13 PM, Hisham <h...@hisham.hm> wrote: >> On 26 September 2013 02:58, Gary V. Vaughan <g...@vaughan.pe> wrote: >> > I was actually pretty surprised that LuaRocks doesn't promote `doc' up to >> > a parent directory like `bin' is. It's a really nice feature of LuaRocks >> > that after installing the Zile (and Specl!) rocks, the zmacs (and specl!) >> > binaries are promoted into my PATH, without any extra fuss. >> > >> > Unix has a tradition of packages populating /usr/share/doc/<package> and >> > /usr/share/man/man1/<package>.1, or similar, and thus users are used to >> > being able to poke around in those directories to find documentation >> > when they get stuck. Is there any way to set up my rockspec so that >> > the manual pages and documents end up where users will expect to find >> > them after installation (and preferably in such a way that `datafile' or >> > similar will still be able to access them)? >> >> I shied away from trying to set any standard path for docs because of the >> mess that docs are in Linux (/usr/doc vs /usr/share/doc — so is 'doc' really >> as toplevel as 'bin'?) *and* the mess that docs are in the Lua world >> (README? LDoc/LuaDoc? index.html? something else entirely?). > > IMHO: Whatever the packager deems appropriate, just the same as if a packager > sets the paths with configure/make without trying to convert everything to > HTML or NROFF format. > > I don't think that it's LuaRocks' job to try to make all the documentation of > every package uniform, and surely leaving reference docs buried in > /usr/local/lib/luarocks/rocks/zile/3-1/docs is barely more useful than not > installing them at all - at least in so far as giving users a chance to find > them! Especially as they are also moved every time the release revision is > bumped… > >> Still, I think we'll have to get to that eventually. > > Maybe a `luarocks docspath zile` subcommand or similar is a good first step?
Right now the best we have is `luarocks show --rock-dir zile`, which is close, but somewhat hidden. The thing is that even the "doc" dir is not uniform -- notice you mentioned /usr/local/lib/luarocks/rocks/zile/3-1/docs in your post above, but the zile subdirectory under the rock dir is actually doc/... might be a simply typo, but some authors use doc/ and others use docs/... it's all those little things. `luarocks docspath zile` is a good suggestion. Could even be part of a more powerful `luarocks docs` command. I'll think about it. Yes, it's impossible to make all the documentation of every package uniform, but we should try to at least get their paths uniform if they are to be eventually installed in a single easy-to-find place, or else we'll end up with a gazillion configuration variables (and probably reinvent autotools in the process :) ). -- Hisham ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
