[Spice-devel] [PATCH spice-common] build-sys: don't dist spice-protocol.html

[Christophe Fergeau]

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 05:02:59AM -0500, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 06:16:12AM -0500, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau at redhat.com>
> > > > 
> > > > The HTML file is not built by default.
> > > > This fixes make distcheck in spice-gtk.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau at redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  docs/Makefile.am | 1 -
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/docs/Makefile.am b/docs/Makefile.am
> > > > index aa7c715..20f46ef 100644
> > > > --- a/docs/Makefile.am
> > > > +++ b/docs/Makefile.am
> > > > @@ -2,7 +2,6 @@ NULL =
> > > >  ASCIIDOC_FLAGS = -a icons -a toc
> > > >  
> > > >  EXTRA_DIST =					\
> > > > -	spice_protocol.html			\
> > > >  	spice_protocol.txt			\
> > > >  	$(NULL)
> > > >  
> > > 
> > > Another option would be to require HTML files.
> > > But I don't think it's important to make it in the
> > > distribution, developers can check txt file and compile
> > > on their own.
> > 
> > We ship .html files in spice-server tarballs, imo it would be better to
> > be consistent and to ship the spice-protocol.html file too.
> 
> in all projects? Imho that would make sense if we had a standalone spice-common, but not in all projects.

Ah, right, we'd need a --enable-docs and only have spice-server use it
by default.


For now,
Acked-by: Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau at redhat.com>

Christophe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/attachments/20170130/b90e1455/attachment.sig>