[racket] documentation format for racket packages

From: Matthew Flatt (mflatt at cs.utah.edu)
Date: Wed Dec 17 22:25:08 EST 2014

At Wed, 17 Dec 2014 22:00:36 -0500, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Two questions, for the documentation of a single-collection package in 
> `.zip` format (in the new package system)...
> * Given that the package is named `mypackage`, must the Scribble file be 
> named `mypackage.scrbl`, or will things work just as well if the file is 
> named `doc.scrbl`?

Document names with the new package system are "global" in the same way
as collection names, executable names, or shared-library names. So,
using the package name is much better than using "doc.scrbl", but
there's no requirement that the document has any particular name.

> * Scribble-generated HTML files should *not* be included in the `.zip`, 
> correct?

Right --- for a source package. A "built" or "binary" package should
include rendered documentation, though.

Consider using the `generate-stripped-directory` function from
`pkg/strip` to select the pieces of directory containing a built
package that should be included in a source, built, or binary package.

Posted on the users mailing list.