bug#33497: [PATCH] Re: bug#33497: Our CMake package has no documentation

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hello Marius!

Sorry for the delay.

Marius Bakke <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello!
>
> Now would be the time to get this in 'core-updates'.
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Maxim Cournoyer <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Our CMake package lacks any documentation (manpage or other). Patch to
>>> follow.
>>>
>>> Maxim
>>
>> Here's the patch to be merged in core-updates (or core-updates-next).
>>
>> From 07625983cd901c94e4ac25b157035c95e33a115e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Maxim Cournoyer <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 01:39:54 -0500
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: cmake: Generate the documentation.
>>
>> This fixes https://bugs.gnu.org/33497.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/cmake.scm (gnu): Use the (gnu package python) and
>> (gnu packages texinfo) modules.
>> (cmake)[configure]: Add arguments to configure so that manual pages, info and
>> HTML documentation is generated.
>> [move-html-doc]: New phase.
>> [native-inputs]: Add the native inputs required for building the
>> documentation.
>> [outputs]: Add a "doc" output.
>
> I'm not very comfortable with pulling python-sphinx into the dependency
> closure of CMake, because then we can't update it or its dependencies
> outside of the 'core-updates' cycle.  It could also cause circular
> dependency issues down the road.
>
> Would it make sense to build the documentation as a separate package?
> In that case it can go on the master branch.

I don't like the idea of having a separate package for the documentation
of cmake because it goes against the expectations of Guix users (package
comes with its manpage, and extra doc can be installed as extra output
of the same package).

Maybe we could have a "cmake-minimal" package we'd keep hidden and use
by default as part of the cmake-build-system, which wouldn't include the
doc, and the regular, user facing cmake would be the one in this patch?

Maxim