Re: Bug#39830: debian-policy: [PROPOSED]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
Hi,
>>"Chris" == Chris Waters <xtifr@dsp.net> writes:
Chris> No, the objection is to the continued use of undocumented(7). The
Chris> goal is to get rid of this,
Umm, really?
Chris> so that we no longer confuse people by making it seem like
Chris> there's a man page when there isn't. I can't tell you how
Chris> furious I get after doing dpkg --listfiles to discover that
Chris> there is a man page, to then run man and find that it's just
Chris> that damnable undocumented(7) symlink again.
And I get mad if I do man binary and I get nothing, after a
long time searching. I prefer that I see a page that tells me that
the developer is aware of this bug. If there is no man page, most
people would file identical bug reopirts about ti, the undocumented
man page is to prevent multiple reports about a known problem.
Chris> Not having a man page is a bug. Using undocumented(7) is a bug, but a
Chris> bug blessed by policy. The idea that policy should bless a bug just
Chris> seems wrong.
The policy does not say it is not a bug. The policy indeed
says you may *NOT* close any bug reported about this.
Chris> Plus, it may well be causing people to think that
Chris> they've solved the problem when they provide a link to
Chris> undocumented(7). "What bug? My package complies with policy."
Then they have not read the policy document. This is a non argument.
Chris> Can you provide any positive arguments in *favor* of undocumented(7)?
Chris> We've been unable to find anyone who can justify it or explain why it
Chris> was adopted as policy in the first place. But, of course, it *was*
Chris> adopted as policy at some point, so surely someone must have had a
Chris> reason, and many of us, including me, are rather curious what that
Chris> reason was.
The idea was to recognize that it may not always be simple to
write a man page, or the maintainer maybe presssed for time, and even
though a man page is required, the package may still have utility
(espescially if the binary is not the main or only binary in the
pages). Rather than not having a man page, and having people write in
multiple bug reports, a place holder was created to let peole know
that the problem was a known one, and that indeed, a bug report
already exists against the package, and they need not waste time
duplicating the bug.
I must confess I never though that peole would wait for dpkg -L
rather than just go man blah. In the latter case, I do find the
presence of a man page comforting, even though it says there is no
documentation.
manoj
--
I know not how I came into this, shall I call it a dying life or a
living death? St. Augustine
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: