[Rubygems-developers] Handling documentation

Chad Fowler chad at chadfowler.com
Fri Nov 28 10:56:21 EST 2003


On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Richard Kilmer wrote:

# 
# On Nov 28, 2003, at 5:25 AM, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
# 
# > OK, so since I mentioned it on ruby-talk and Chad and Jim replied
# > positively, let's talk about if and how Gems should deal with
# > documentation.
# >
# > Note: I don't want to waste anyone's time or distract developers from
# > the basics, especially with an upcoming release.
# 
# Please...its not a distraction...we have been talking about this.
# 

Agreed.

# > There's plenty of things to talk about wrt default options and
# > behaviours, but no need to worry about that now.  I just want to know
# > if the way I'm thinking is compatible with you guys.
# 
# Very compatible.  Actually, right now the gem spec:
# 
# see - http://rubygems.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?GemSpecification
# 
# You can specify a list of files to be included in the #files array, I
# was thinking of also having another array:
# 
# #docs
# 
# Which would have a list of rdoc or whatever doc type you want files
# that would be included in the Gem, but would not be extracted during
# install...but that you could specify the above mentioned:
# 

I wouldn't want to actually include the rdoc'd docs in the distribution.  
Is that what you were thinking, rich?  I would just have --rdoc be a gem 
command and do the rdoc'ing at that point.  Therefore, the #docs array 
could be nothing but static documentation, which would be extracted as-is 
and the rest of the documentation would come from rdoc.

Maybe this is what you were saying.  I'm still not quite awake. :)


Chad



More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list