Re: [ng-spice] Docs
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 11:28:40PM +0200, Manu Rouat wrote:
> Arno wrote:
>
> > The online documentation should be compiled into the program (as
> > opposed to be put in a separate file). This allows for i18n using the
> > gettext library. For a more extensive treatment of the subject, we
> > could fork an info reader or web browser and have it search for the
> > relevant term in the index. This is what Octave (a Matlab
> > replacement) does. It works quite nicely.
>
> Agreed. But don't we have the same problem with gettext as with readline?
>I'm
> not sure whether gettext is GPL or not (but read my next post about
>licensing
> issues)
New versions of glibc include gettext. glibc comes under the LGPL.
AFAIK, its allows linking itself to GPL, BSD and commercial programs
provided it can be relinked with newer versions of the library.
Instead of this caricature, you should read the license proper for a
detailed picture of what you can and cannot do with it.
> > So far, the texinfo manual mostly covers the needs of the seasoned
> > users. It mostly lacks a good index to be truly useful. On the other
> > hand, I would like to see the descriptions of the devices be put in
> > their respective directories. This also fits nicely into the proposed
> > library approach to the device simulation. The final reference
> > documentation can include the different parts.
>
> I think this is rather heavy - don't forget that many devices have been
> very well documented elsewhere (like bsim3 for instance). Should we include
> this documentation? I'd rather do the documentation as a reference, but
>distribute
> it separately (via a web page would be the easiest - we can put links)
>
> We should only supply a users manual in the tar.gz.
First of all, we should welcome any documentation written on any part
of the system. And unless copyright doesn't allow it, I find no harm
in collecting the available information and distributing it to the
user community. See it as a service to our users and to ourselves:
the more they can find in the documentation the less they will bother
us with silly questions. (Well,... at least, that's what I hope!)
Also consider those users _without_ an internet connection (yes, I
know this is hard). Getting the info with their CDROM distribution is
a big help.
Oh, and if you're worried it will bloat the source distribution beyond
recognition, you can always package it in a separate tar-ball with
it's own release cycle. Sort of a Spice Documentation Project.
--
Arno
Partial thread listing: