[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Possible mass bug filing: non-doc packages recommending doc packages

Y Giridhar Appaji Nag <appaji@debian.org> wrote:

> I filed a lintian wishlist bug (#527363) requesting a I/W tag when non
> documentation packages recommend documentation packages.

That might be a good idea. However, for the texlive packages, we'll just
add lintian overrides.

> With Install-Recommends being the default, many packages pull in a lot of
> associated documentation.  These documentation packages are sometimes large
> and could be suggested rather than recommended.  I noticed different opinions
> about such bugs on the BTS (See #504042 that went on to be fixed and #526153
> that was not).  I understand that upstream would sometimes like documentation
> to be installed alongside the binaries, 

For many parts of texlive, the license requires binary distributions to
be complete. This is why we refused to create separate doc packages for
a long time in the past. We have only separated the doc packages after
Recommends became installed by default.

At least that's how I recall the order of events; I might be wrong, but
I think the argument holds nevertheless: We can do the splitting of the
docs only because it takes a deliberate action to get rid of them, just
as anyone receiving a "complete binary distribution" is able to rm -rf
the doc directory.

> Would there be any objections to filing minor/wishlist bugs against these
> packages?

We'll just add wontfix tags, so you might as well not bother to file the
bugs against the texlive packages.

Regards, Frank
Dr. Frank Küster
Debian Developer (TeXLive)
VCD Aschaffenburg-Miltenberg, ADFC Miltenberg
B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg

Reply to: