Re: Policy for documentation of ELPA

[Chong Yidong]

"Evgeny M. Zubok" <address@hidden> writes:

> And what about the documentation in compiled format? org-mode and muse
> have its own upstream development and they keep the documentation
> sources there. The developers commit only user-readable documentation
> into ELPA and they don't commit the texinfo. `debbugs' uses ELPA for
> development. So, we have no other option than to store texinfo file in
> ELPA. No problem. The main question is about the documentation in human
> readable format. ELPA contains the files as they will be installed at
> user side, right? Should I manually re-generate the final documentation
> every time I have made even the little change in texinfo file? Can I do
> it not very often? Where the documentation should arrive when the user
> installs the ELPA package?

For packages developed in the GNU ELPA bzr repository, the texinfo file
should be in the same place as the sources, e.g. packages/FOO/doc/.  The
generated Info file should be in packages/FOO/dir, so that package.el
will add it to Info-directory-list.

I think Stefan's idea of optional per-package Makefiles is a good way to
handle this, and I'll look into implementing it.  For now, the manual
you have written could be added to the repository and manually converted
into Info.