As for me I'm doing few Python projects and as I said before I prefer to have (real) offline docs, cuz often visit places far from "civilization" and where 150Kib/s considered as pretty fast Internet connection. Also I'm very patient on keeping my Gentoo system under control and minimized (eliminating unnecessary dependencies and files). I could help with adding patches and bug reports for packages I use.
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On śro, 2017-05-17 at 21:44 -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote: > > On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 09:32:46AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > > On pią, 2017-05-12 at 17:42 -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote: > > > > On 05/11/2017 12:51 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > In fact, I'm personally leaning towards not building docs at all > > > > > in ebuilds. It's practically a wasted effort since most of the time > > > > > users read docs online anyway. > > > > > > > > I believe that's a little myopic; a user (or even developer) may not > > > > have Internet access all the time, or may not have it in their > primary > > > > development environment. Having a copy of the docs locally (the > entire > > > > point of USE="doc") is super valuable to have when you're away from > the > > > > network. I'm sure I'm not alone as one of the people who uses the > flag > > > > and appreciates the work that goes into making sure said flag works. > > > > > > > > Sure, we could yank out every single USE="doc", but then we lose a > nice > > > > feature of the tree and users are back to either (a) trawling the > Web to > > > > find the project site, then hope they have docs in a separate > download, > > > > or (b) we end up with foo+1 packages, one extra for any package that > has > > > > documentation. Neither are particularly good solutions; Debian has > done > > > > the latter and it results in a huge number of packages for little > gain. > > > > > > The Python team mostly focuses on providing packages for dependencies > of > > > other Gentoo packages, not direct Python development. We do not have > > > the manpower to go above that. > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Michał Górny > > > > Ah, well that at least explains why you're not interested in it. > > Dependency management alone can be tough; I've not noticed any Python > > issues, so it seems like you guys do well. :) If you don't mind me > > asking, what would it take to solve the USE="doc" issue to the Python > > team's standard? I have some personal interest in Python and wouldn't > > mind adding 'doc' support for Python packages that users request docs > > for. > > > > Maybe others are willing to join me on this. Is that something we can > > make happen without getting in anyone's hair? > > > > For a start, it'd be nice to figure all the stuff out in detail, > and document it -- when USEDEP is needed, not needed, when we need > something else (like the plugin case). Once that is done, it's just > a matter of checking and fixing existing packages, and being patient > with devs doing the same mistakes again ;-). > > -- > Best regards, > Michał Górny >
