[bug?] docs in Documentation/technical/ do not seem to be distributed

[bug?] docs in Documentation/technical/ do not seem to be distributed

[Samuel Lijin]

It's possible this may have nothing to do with the Git project itself
because I have absolutely no idea how this is handled on the packaging
side or, possibly, if this is actually intended.

There are a couple of links floating around in the man pages pointing
to pages in technical/, such as to technical/api-credentials.html in
gitcredentials(7) [1]. On the website and man pages for Arch Linux and
Ubuntu, this link is broken.

On the website, nothing in technical/ seems to be linked to at all.
(If it is, I didn't spend enough time searching.)

On Arch (git v2.12.2), this link points at
/usr/share/doc/git-doc/technical/api-credentials.html; however, this
file does not exist:

$ ls /usr/share/doc/git-doc
git-subtree.html

On Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (git v2.11.0 from the git-core PPA), this link
points at /usr/share/doc/git/html/technical/api-credentials.html;
however, this file does not exist:

$ ls /usr/share/doc/git/
changelog.Debian.gz
changelog.gz
contrib
copyright
NEWS.Debian.gz
README.Debian
README.emacs
README.md
README.source
RelNotes

[1] https://github.com/git/git/blob/v2.12.2/Documentation/gitcredentials.txt#L184

Re: [bug?] docs in Documentation/technical/ do not seem to be distributed

[Jonathan Nieder]

Hi,

Samuel Lijin wrote:

> It's possible this may have nothing to do with the Git project itself
> because I have absolutely no idea how this is handled on the packaging
> side or, possibly, if this is actually intended.
>
> There are a couple of links floating around in the man pages pointing
> to pages in technical/, such as to technical/api-credentials.html in
> gitcredentials(7) [1]. On the website and man pages for Arch Linux and
> Ubuntu, this link is broken.

This sounds like a packaging bug in Arch Linux and Ubuntu.

That said, at least in Ubuntu, I am not able to reproduce it.  Do
you have the git-doc (or git-all, which depends on git-doc) package
installed?

Hope that helps,
Jonathan

Re: [bug?] docs in Documentation/technical/ do not seem to be distributed

[Samuel Lijin]

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Samuel Lijin wrote:
>
>> It's possible this may have nothing to do with the Git project itself
>> because I have absolutely no idea how this is handled on the packaging
>> side or, possibly, if this is actually intended.
>>
>> There are a couple of links floating around in the man pages pointing
>> to pages in technical/, such as to technical/api-credentials.html in
>> gitcredentials(7) [1]. On the website and man pages for Arch Linux and
>> Ubuntu, this link is broken.
>
> This sounds like a packaging bug in Arch Linux and Ubuntu.
>
> That said, at least in Ubuntu, I am not able to reproduce it.  Do
> you have the git-doc (or git-all, which depends on git-doc) package
> installed?

That was the answer on the Ubuntu machine. Doesn't apply to Arch,
though, so I guess I'll reach out upstream there. I've also opened
#994 on the git/git-scm.com repo for this.

Out of curiosity, do you know why it's distributed like that?

Thanks,
Sam

Re: [bug?] docs in Documentation/technical/ do not seem to be distributed

[brian m. carlson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1276 bytes --]

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:03:09PM -0500, Samuel Lijin wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This sounds like a packaging bug in Arch Linux and Ubuntu.
> >
> > That said, at least in Ubuntu, I am not able to reproduce it.  Do
> > you have the git-doc (or git-all, which depends on git-doc) package
> > installed?
> 
> That was the answer on the Ubuntu machine. Doesn't apply to Arch,
> though, so I guess I'll reach out upstream there. I've also opened
> #994 on the git/git-scm.com repo for this.
> 
> Out of curiosity, do you know why it's distributed like that?

I expect the answer for Ubuntu is that it's the way that Debian does it.

Debian traditionally distributes documentation in a separate package
because it's architecture independent, and the binaries are not.
Therefore, including it in the main package would bloat the archive
substantially by including a copy of identical data for each
architecture.

Doing it this way also allows people to not install documentation that
they don't need, say, on a server.
-- 
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 | https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 868 bytes --]