Re: README - confusing, irrelevant, redundant, useless
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 12:55 -0400, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> While I agree the README can be confusing, I think we do a disservice
> to our upstream by not including it.
That's my gut feeling too.
> I think a better solution would be to duplicate all the important
> information about the software into the README.Debian and train users
> to read that soley.
Duplication should be avoided when possible. It's a lot of work. If
you want to cross-reference particular parts of upstream's README in
README.Debian, that's far preferable.
Why not just help improve upstream's README when you encounter poor
quality work? That's what you'd do with code, wouldn't you?
> The original readme is still intact for those
> users who care.
I don't think upstream's original, untainted README should be considered
sacrosanct, any more than any source code file in the same package. If
it can be improved, patch it. Then send your patches upstream. If they
reject your patches, work with them until you arrive at a consensus. If
a consensus can't be reached, continue to ship your version. If you're
worried about people being confused about "missing" material you've
excised, state up front what you've done to it. The curious can always
obtain the "untainted" README from the source package.