Re: documentation for packages

[Aleksey Cheusov <cheusov%tut.by@localhost>]

 >> Try to split dozen of packages you need into -doc and -base
 >> subpackages.  And I believe very soon you'll realize how much this
 >> "benefit" costs ;-)

> I didn't say it would be easy or come for free. But I'm sure pkgsrc
> could provide some framework to help package maintainers with the
> process.

"subpackages" was discussed years ago and nobody implemented them since
then. Option enabling/disabling documentation is much easier to
implement. But you proposed to make "rule of thumb".  Personally, I
don't think such a rule is a good idea. It adds huge amount of extrawork
without significant benefits.

 >> Seriously speaking, in order to not waste time for compiling packages,
 >> use binary repositories or run bulk builds and don't "wait" for them, i.e.
 >> use prebuilt packages.

> After all it is still pkg*src*, not pkg*bin*. Are there up-to-date
> binary repositories for all architectures pkgsrc supports? The most
> recent binaries for SunOS/sparc on ftp.netbsd.org seem to be from
> October 2009.  The repositories provided by Gilles and Tim mentioned
> there seem to be of similar age.

Yes, situation for non-{Net,DragonFly}BSD is much worse.

> And as Tim already noticed, I will not find those packages that fail
> to compile on my system, either.
It is extreamely hard work to maintain packages on all systems and
compilers supported by PkgSrc. Package maintainers cannot do this work
alone. If the package you need fails on Solaris, just fix it and
send-pr. If you cannot, try to talk to upstream and/or package maintainer.

-- 
Best regards, Aleksey Cheusov.