Re: /usr/doc/copyright/<package> -> /usr/doc/<package>/copyright ?
Guy Maor writes ("Re: /usr/doc/copyright/<package> -> /usr/doc/<package>/copyright ?"):
...
> I don't think we should move the copyright file. Most people don't
> ever need to look at them, so it's simpler if they're out of the way.
What about the changelog ?
In general I'm not convinced that keeping things `out of the user's
way' is a good idea - especially given that the copyright file is the
only one that's guaranteed to exist. If we're not careful we'll have
the user only looking at the copyright file, having achieved the
effect of keeping all the other documentation out of the way :-).
Isn't the name `copyright' sufficiently clear that people will avoid
reading it when they don't need to ?
> We should discourage making a symlink from /usr/doc/<package> to the
> copyright directory. Maintainers are probably just using the copyright
> more as a general readme. The copyright file need only contain
> (surprise) copyright information.
I've done this in the new manual.
> I do, however, think we should move the examples directory. I've
> always thought the distinction between /usr/doc/<package> and
> /usr/doc/examples/<package> was arbitrary. It usually leads to the
> obtuse arrangement where the example is in one directory and its
> accompanying documentation is another.
Indeed. I've put this in the new policy manual.
Ian.
Reply to: