Re: gEDA-dev: What should be included in the dist file?

["John Luciani" <jluciani-at-NOSPAMgmail_dot_com>]

On 8/16/06, al davis <ad106@freeelectron.net> wrote:

> Documentation:

1. HTML files?  yes (nice for quick reference using a browser)
2. DVI files?   no (use the pdf or compile the La/TeX files
3. PDF files?   yes (nice for printing and scaling pages)
4. PS files?    no (use the pdf or compile the La/TeX files)

> Should several options be offered:
> 1. complete (including processed docs)
> 2. source only
> 3. processed docs
> 4. testing files

My preference is to install everything rather than answering
a lot of questions or having to run an install multiple times.

> What about generated "source" files?
> These are files in C or whatever, that look like source, but are
> actually generated.  My experience is that to include them tricks
> people into thinking they are source, causing more problems, but may
> allow them to build when a translation program (m4, awk,
> gnucap-modelgen, autoconf) is not available.

Requiring basic tools like m4, awk, etc. does not seem
like an unreasonably requirement.

(* jcl *)
-- 
http://www.luciani.org


_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev