[MPlayer-DOCS] Proposal: split manpages

Jonas Jermann jjermann at gmx.net
Fri Oct 22 22:58:26 CEST 2004


On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 10:35:27PM +0200, Carl Fûrstenberg wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:54:31 +0200, Jonas Jermann <jjermann at gmx.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:17:55PM -0400, D Richard Felker III wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 07:24:16PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > > > first we have row 4762 to 7133 that is mencoder only, then it's a lot
> > > > > of sections marked mplayer only. also it's many places thats marked
> > > > > only suitable in mplayer/mencoder.
> > > > >
> > > > > I just proposed to split out everything that was mencoder only to a own
> > > > > manpage.
> > > >
> > > > We've been discussing it with Rich in another thread (last month?)
> > > > and on IRC. There was an idea to split some common parts like
> > > > codecs, filters and audio filters into separate manpages. Rich, are
> > > > you still in favour of that?
> > >
> > > iirc i was never in favor of it, but i might not be too opposed if
> > > it's done in a sane way. but i really juet like being able to run "man
> > > mplayer", hit the slash key, and instantly find any topic i want for
> > > mplayer or mencoder. breaking up into lots of little man pages makes
> > > finding the info you want a lot slower!
> > 
> > I agree. I don't have a problem with a big man page...
> > 
> > A sane way for me would be to somehow generate both man pages
> > mplayer.1 and mencoder.1 from a common file, but as (g)roff is soo much broken
> > you will _most_ probably not be able to do it without conversion problems.
> > One reason to say this is the mess I saw when I checked how to generate
> > html/txt/other output _from_ a man page. _Every_ program had it's flaws and we
> > ended up changing the man page itself to produce a nice html output (imo not
> > a good idea). It's just a bad, ugly format (imo). ;)
> > 
> > But perhaps it could be done with a normal perl script that uses some meta
> > information (non visible comments) that converts the huge man page into
> > mplayer/mencoder parts by just filtering out specific lines, donno...
> > 
> > Regards
> >         Jonas
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > MPlayer-DOCS mailing list
> > MPlayer-DOCS at mplayerhq.hu
> > http://mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/mplayer-docs
> > 
> 
> I before attached a little xsl-file that could convert xml to
> man-page, it would be easy to add a tag 'only="mencoder"' or
> 'only="mplayer"', and when parsing it put right thing in right
> manpage. also if made in xml there is much easier to produce html.

In my opinion there are two problems with this:

1) Someone has to do it. ;)
2) I don't trust converters, they often lead to problems in one or
   another way especially with roff as it is full of small
   macros/stuff that don't seem to make sense...

Personally I'd really prefer to keep the documentation in the form it
will be distributed. The xml documentation is a bit an exception but the
man page is really mainly used as the man page, so I don't see much sense
in using a common format.

It's also easy to do what you describe without forcing xml and the
main man page could still be used without conversion tools.


Regards
	Jonas




More information about the MPlayer-DOCS mailing list