Re: /usr/share/doc (was Re: weekly policy summary)
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> Let me summarise the proposals so far as I see them: (in order of my
> personal preference)
> * symlinks managed by postinst/prerm
> - requires lots of packages to add postinsts/prerms for potato
> and woody, and then to get rid of them for woody+1
> - may leave crufty symlinks about on systems where (a) the admin
> doesn't fix it (b) hasn't had the base packages upgraded to woody+1
> * do nothing special
> - means the admin, and all automated tools have to look in both places
> or miss documentation
You missed one MAJOR proposal. Mine.
* Stick with /usr/doc until potato is released, then begin a massive
migration, which may or may not involve symlinks.
- we can't pretend FHS compliance (but we couldn't anyway).
- some people have already moved and may not want to move back.
+ may not need crufty symlinks.
+ gives us a little more time to decide if we want crufty
symlinks, and if so, what's the best way to handle it.
+ no surprises to the user.
+ no changes to most packages till after potato's release.
--
Chris Waters xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
Reply to: