Re: Proposal ocaml guidelines

[Hans de Goede <j w r degoede hhs nl>]

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Nigel Jones wrote:
> > Sorry to come into the discussion a bit later than expected.
> > Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > The proposal I mailed to the list yesterday is now available here:
> > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/OCaml
> > > What's the thinking behind removing *.mli by default?  Even in packages
> > > which are well documented, the *.mli files are the definitive reference
> > > for programmers.  I think they should always be in the -devel 
> > > subpackage.
> > I replaced it in ocaml-SDL and ocaml-camlimages with ocamldoc generated
> > html references, which seems to be pretty much the same as the
> > individual mli files.
>
> But I wanna use 'less'!
>
> Seriously, I don't want to fire up a browser just to check an interface. 
>  Even the text mode browsers have serious UI problems compared to
> 'less /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08.3/list.mli'.
>
> Is there any reason why *.mli files can't be included in a -devel 
> package?  I'm not talking about the main library package where it would 
> add bloat, but in a package which would only need to be installed by 
> developers.

Other then size, no. So if there is a use for them, and appearantly there is, I 
guess the not shipping of them should be removed from the guidelines (thats why 
they are a draft :)

Regards,

Hans