[bug#57280] [PATCH 0/3] Add documentation-files argument to emacs build system.

[Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com>]

Am Dienstag, dem 30.08.2022 um 11:15 +0300 schrieb Andrew Tropin:
> On 2022-08-29 18:38, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> 
> > Am Freitag, dem 26.08.2022 um 17:33 +0300 schrieb Andrew Tropin:
> > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > Cheers
> > > 
> > > I went through a few popular packages and came up with conclusion
> > > that it's hard to make good heuristic for automatical
> > > documentation
> > > build:
> > > 
> > > 1. I tried (find-files "." "\\.(texi|txi|texinfo)$") with
> > > consequent
> > > for-each and it doesn't work in general case because it will
> > > build
> > > files intended for inclusion, not standalone building.
> > Fair enough, there's probably similar issues with org etc.  That
> > said,
> > wouldn't the top-level info/org/whatever file share the package
> > name?
> > 
> 
> In many cases, yes it would, but not always.
> 
> magit: ("docs/magit.texi" "docs/magit-section.texi")
Is magit-section a top-level file?

> geiser: ("doc/geiser.texi")
I think trying docs?/whatever is good praxis, so I count that as a hit.

> geiser-guile: ("geiser-guile.texi")
Hit.

> dash: ("dash.texi")
Hit.

> orderless: ("orderless.texi")
Hit.

> consult/cape/tempel: ("README.org")
Hit for README.whatever

> cider: ("doc/modules/ROOT/nav.adoc")
Miss.

> all-the-icons: ("README.md")
Hit for README.whatever

> citar: ("README.org")
Hit for README.whatever

> org-roam: ("doc/org-roam.texi")
Hit.

> debbugs: ("debbugs.texi" "debbugs-ug.texi")
Is debbugs-ug a top-level file?

> modus-themes: ("doc/modus-themes.org")
Hit.

> > 
> > 
> > > It seems that manual approach is more precise, less intrusive and
> > > helps to get rid of many custom and non-uniform documentation
> > > build
> > > phases.
> > If you're going for a "manual" approach, I'd suggest instead making
> > a curried ((build-documentation #:texinfo-files #:texinfo-regexp
> > ...)
> > #:outputs ...) so that the files can be written directly into the
> > (add-after ...) syntax.
> 
> Do you mean to make a helper function, which can be used to generate
> a closure of build phase, which can be added with replace/add-after?
> 
> Another idea is to make a separate functions for different
> documentation
> type: build-{texinfo,markdown,org,etc}-documentation.  Also, it seems
> useful outside of emacs-build-system as well.
Hmm, if we wanted to make that even more generic than just emacs, it'd
go to core-updates.  

> In such case user will need to accomplish following steps: 1. add
> texinfo/pandoc/emacs-org dependency 2. use modify-phases to add
> (build-{texinfo,whatever}-documentation #:texinfo-files
> '("doc/manual.{texi,whatever}")), seems a little less convenient than
> simple #:documentation-files #~(list "manual.{texi,whatever}"), but
> also work, at least documentation will be built more uniformly for
> different packages.
> 
> WDYT?
I think if we want to go this more generic route, we'd have to redesign
this a little.  For instance, (build-texinfo-documentation) should take
regular expressions as remaining arguments.  As for the native-inputs
required, there has already been a precedent set with bash-minimal that
anything requiring extraneous inputs needs to declare them explicitly.

Cheers