Re: How about some uniformity in doc names
On 11 Oct 1999, David Coe wrote:
> Johnie Ingram <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Just noticed there are 113 packages using the 'foo-doc' convention,
> > and 7 using 'foo-docs.' Does anyone else think it would be nice if
> > everything was foo-doc?
> > Policy doesn't cover this currently.
> While you're at it, I think policy should also provide guidance
> about whether the foo-doc package belongs in the same Section as
> foo, or belongs in the doc section.
Maybe should the policy told about libraries, too?
The common naming scheme is 'lib*', but there are 'xlib6g' and 'zlib1g'
which broke this convention.
The most of packages with libraries belongs in the 'lib' section.
I think the *-doc should belong in the 'doc' section.
Piotr "Dexter" Roszatycki