[Haskell-cafe] No fish, please

[Andrew Coppin]

On 18/05/2011 10:39 PM, Andrew Coppin wrote:
> On 18/05/2011 05:28 AM, Don Stewart wrote:
>> I'm intrigued by the idea of Hackage docs that don't use Haddock.
>
> This is basically the reason I asked. Currently Cabal assumes that
> Haddock is the only tool of its kind. If somebody built a better
> Haddock, you wouldn't be able to use it. (Unless you named the
> executable "haddock" and made it accept the same command options.)
>
> Also, Haddock generates API reference documentation. It does not really
> support generating tutorials, introductions, HOWTOs, and all the other
> types of useful documentation that a project ought to have.

Apparently there's already a ticket for this:

http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/ticket/330

It seems part of the reason for inaction is that people would like a 
general way of saying how to generate different types of documentation. 
Myself, I would be content with a way to say "put *these* files with 
documentation and tell the user where you've put them" as a first step. 
We can worry about how to *generate* various types of documentation later...