On Mon, May 29, 2000 at 09:23:17PM +1000, Sirtaj Singh Kang wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2000 at 12:26:46PM +0100, David Faure wrote:
> > kdoc now has some docbook documentation, but since it doesn't use
> > automake nor am_edit, it doesn't compile anymore.
> > I have started to fiddle with it, but it turns out to be quite complex to fix.
> > In fact it brings to the following question:
> > do we consider kdoc a separate package or a KDE package ?
> 
> Considering that kdoc has no dependencies on KDE, and KDE has none on kdoc,
> I believe it is a standalone package. Besides, dozens of people who use
> kdoc without KDE will be most annoyed if KDE is required to run kdoc.
To compile its doc, rather, but I get the point.

> Is the jade stuff the only issue? If so, I will see how other (non-KDE) 
> packages that have docbook documentation do it.

Ok, looks like the solution then. Effectively, this means sort of
reverting most of Eric's commit (namely the Makefile.am).

> > And if kdoc is to use the standard KDE framework, then it has to be fully
> > converted to automake. My current hack (partial use of automake, only for
> 
> It seems to me that the only part of the "standard KDE framework" that KDOC
> would use is the directory structure. Or is there something else I'm
> missing?
Yes, if it doesn't use kdb2html.

> Note that the KDE admin/ directory is ~50% larger than KDOC itself!
;-))

-- 
David FAURE
david@mandrakesoft.com, faure@kde.org
http://home.clara.net/faure/
KDE, Making The Future of Computing Available Today