On 26-Sep-09, at 12:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > On Sep 25, 2009, at 8:31 PM, Kwankyu wrote: > >>> It is totally feasible. It hasn't happened only because nobody has >>> done it. I think the only good reasonable longterm way to do this >>> would be to modify the spkg-install for each and every package so >>> that >>> it installs documentation for that package into >>> $SAGE_LOCAL/doc/pkgname. This way when one upgrades a package, one >>> will also upgrade the corresponding docs. We would not require >>> that >>> doc be built from source though. An extra advantage of this >>> approach >>> is that you can start small -- just start with a single spkg and >>> work >>> your way to others over time. >>> >> >> +1 to this approach. First thing to do will be to modify the >> developer >> manual to insist the spkg maintainers to install the documentation as >> well as the package itself. > > I like this approach as well, as long as it doesn't double the size > of Sage. Likelihood of this being maintained? Very low. Why are we choosing to do things that are low value and unlikely to be maintained? And at this point, which sage component doesn't have its documentation on the web -- latest version, everything maintained upstream? Nick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
