[rfc][icedtea-web] javaws -version flag

Omair Majid omajid at redhat.com
Thu Mar 6 18:00:04 UTC 2014

* Jiri Vanek <jvanek at redhat.com> [2014-03-06 12:30]:
> No. You misunderstood me completely. The will to maintain them is
> missing. I 100% agree that they are necessary.

Ah, well that's a different matter. I will try and help.

> On 03/06/2014 05:52 PM, Omair Majid wrote:
> >* Jiri Vanek<jvanek at redhat.com>  [2014-03-06 11:29]:
> >>  First half of previous 8 months I was ignoring them willingly,
> >>  because I hoped to have the generated ones prepared for 1.5.
> >
> >I don't know if generated ones are the magic bullet you think they are.
> >Either way you have to write the documentation. And some parts of the
> >documentation don't belong in code. Still, generated or not, we need
> >some place where users can find documentation.
> 100% yes, and the man pages are th way to go.
> They may be the magic bullet if I fulfil my idea.

Fair enough. My original suggestion was: let's add a tiny fix (document
-version) while we wait for the bigger (and better) fix (the
auto-generated man pages).

> Right. Right now there is only javaws.1 Imho two more are misisng. And
> manpage for "package name" is good recomandation.

I am not so sure. `man man` says:

"man is the system's manual pager. Each page argument given to man is
normally the name of a program, utility or function"

`javaws` qualifies as a program, but does icedtea-web?

Isn't a README the more appropriate place for this? Do you know of
examples where there is a man page for a package where package name is
different from the binary name?

Any way, if you want to add more documentation and maintain it, that's
perfectly fine with me :)

> It can be jsut see javaws + expalinig alternatives, or something more
> general. Also it may be spec patch only.

*If* we decide that this it not very useful upstream, maybe we should
encourage downstream to follow? 

> >>, itw-settings manpage is missing - and
> >>it is HUGE man page, and newly policyeditor is missing.
> >
> >For self-explanatory GUIs, I am not sure we need detailed man pages.
> >They mostly make sense for command line programs that take lots of
> Self expalantory???  The itw-settings have incredible cmd line support!

Haha. I wrote that :)

I meant that it's fairly simple to document the cli bits (there's only 4
or so commands, right) and the GUI is self-explanatory. So the man page
shouldn't be that large.


PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/)
Fingerprint = F072 555B 0A17 3957 4E95  0056 F286 F14F 6648 4681

More information about the distro-pkg-dev mailing list