Shall we require /usr/doc/$(package)?
I noticed that the news-0.8-1 package places a README in /usr/doc/news. As it
happens, that directory contains the documentation for trn. At first, I was
inclined to file this as a bug report against news (for stealing a doc dir)
*and* trn (for using a badly chosen doc dir). But I couldn't find a word in
the Guidelines about using /usr/doc/$(package) for $package. IMHO such a rule
would make sense, I often find myself looking for /usr/doc/$(package) as a
source for information. A quick glance on my box shows that the following
directories are created with names different to their package names:
ghostscript gs
news trn
smail-admin-guide smail
Shall we require that documentation should be placed in /usr/doc/$(package),
and examples into /usr/doc/examples/$(package)?
With the steadily increasing number of packages, this would avoid name
clashes as the one reported above.
--
Dirk Eddelb"uttel http://qed.econ.queensu.ca/~edd
Reply to: