Re: Policy 12.3: should I rename?

[Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no>]

]] Wookey 

> On 2016-07-23 18:58 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > ]] Geert Stappers 
> > 
> > > FWIW I agree with both '"main package "should have documentation'
> > > and 'additional documentation in separate doc package'.
> > 
> > I think we should stop recommending documentation be put in a separate
> > package and tell people who don't want docs to exclude the relevant
> > parts of /usr/share/doc using dpkg excludes instead.  Disk space is
> > pretty cheap and we keep complaining about the per-package overhead in
> > Packages.gz, so it should be a net gain for most people.
> 
> Wouldn't that apply to all packages, as opposed to being able to
> choose docs-or-not on a per-package basis if installing the packages
> or not? Being able to chose this per-package rather than in-general
> seems like something that has value. But perhaps dpkg excludes let me
> do this per-package too?

dpkg excludes are path based, so you can exclude a single package (or
exclude all and include a single one, etc).

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are