Re: Improve access to documentation in Info format

["Björn Bidar" <bjorn.bidar@thaodan.de>]

Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@gmail.com> writes:

> Björn Bidar <bjorn.bidar@thaodan.de> writes:
>
>> If we want to improve info in general, Emacs package.el repositories are
>> not the best option.
>> It should be easy to package the missing manuals for the major package
>> formats and possibly provide packages for other distribution which don't
>> include the manuals. The last option would be to provide download
>> options for the info files.
>
> While you provide other options, it's not clear why ELPA repositories
> aren't a good fit.  ELPA repositories are platform-agnostic and would
> provide access to Info manuals wherever Emacs runs.  Additionally, Emacs
> provides one of the better Info readers, and implicit in the fact that
> we are discussing this on emacs-devel is the assumption that the
> intended users are Emacs users.

Wherever Emacs runs not everyone uses Emacs. Application agnostic
solutions would improve info usage in general and not only Emacs.

> Improving the existing package definitions in the "major package
> formats", though helpful, is orthogonal in my opinion.  Providing access
> to Info manuals via ELPA repositories in no way prevents these efforts.
> However, emacs-devel may not be the best place to discuss such efforts.

Proving these manuals would require resources, which would be used only
Emacs user would benefit from. Packaging manuals which are generated into texinfo
would require more infrastructure which would have to run to generate
these manuals besides makeinfo.
The build environment for these manuals would have to be provided by GNU
to generate from source to info files.

Also because package.el isn't for the distribution of manuals or other files
which can be used with modes.

I don't know how generic topics are handled across mailinglists,
especially not when a problem is not specific to the topic at hand i.e.
Emacs.

>> Fixing the license of the manuals would also go a long way of including
>> these manuals. Trying to use the resources of the FSF to reach out and
>> try to rectify such long standing issues would help very much.
>> Such things are not possible for individual contributors I'd say.
>
> Do you have examples of manuals whose existing license constraints would
> hinder their inclusion in NonGNU ELPA?

Not in NonGNU as the GNU itself is the creator of (most) of these
manuals which created the problems that the GFDL has.