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

Re: tar files in example dirs



joost witteveen wrote:
> ...
> and I prefer to leave room for the maintainers.

Well, I always think that if the maintainer has a reason to do something
and assert this somewhere, he can do that way.
Then we can discuss his reasons, but this is a different thing.


> Personally, I'd say: talk to the maintainers of the packages
> that have "real doc .tar.gz" files, and ask why they did it.

Well I prefered to discuss on debian policy instead of raising bugs.
But maybe this way could be even better, I agree.


> I presume that most of the times, they do it because the upstream
> source does it, and they probably wouldn't mind untarring them.

... and maybe you can agree that this isn't a strong reason, eh?

> 
> > Note that I would like to have "example" files (not only docs, but
> > also code example and config examples) referenced inside html docs
> > as links to the file, not to the tarball.
> 
> Sure.


another example that came to my mind is the recent post on debian-user
of a user asking if there is a "driver" for a DJ printer to print
postscript on it.
I would have liked to reply him:

	"Doing a grep dj on the file Contents that is on the ftp site 
	or your CD you can discover that package magicfilter installs 
	a file /usr/doc/examples/magicfilter/examples/dj550c-filter",
 
but I couldn't say that because that file is in a tarball and doesn't
show in the Contents file or using dpkg -S .

Could this be a good reason to force maintainers untar them?


What do others thinks?

Fabrizio
-- 
| fpolacco@icenet.fi    fpolacco@debian.org    fpolacco@pluto.linux.it
| Pluto Leader - Debian Developer & Happy Debian 1.3.1 User - vi-holic
| 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E


Reply to: