Sean O'Dell wrote:

> On Thursday 08 July 2004 15:46, James Britt wrote:
> 
>>Dave Thomas wrote:
>>
>>>On Jul 8, 2004, at 14:40, James Britt wrote:
>>>
>>>>I ran make install-doc.
>>>>ri worked.
>>>>
>>>>Not the most obvious path for me, but there you go.
>>>
>>>Perhaps you  might mention that over on ruby-core...
>>
>>I just might.  I believe there was previous discussion there on whether
>>rdocs/ri should be installed by default or not; I'd vote Yes (and may
>>have even said so at the time), but I don't recall what the counter
>>arguments were.
> 
> 
> Why not split Ruby into two distributions, the core Ruby binaries and 
> libraries needed to run Ruby scripts, and a developer distribution which 
> contains irb, ri, rdocs and anything else a Ruby developer would need.
> 
> 	Sean O'Dell
> 
> 

irb, ri, rdocs etc are all very small.  All the documentation is from 
the actual source, it's a question as to whether they should be 
generated automatically that's all.  I don't really think that warrants 
splitting the distribution.  I'm just suggesting you can disable it with 
--disable-install-doc as a configure option, and have enable the default.

Charles Comstock