Re: Bug#62378: Redundant directory and package name
> > > Except that a package named doc-rfc will already have files in
> > > /usr/share/doc/doc-rfc (copyright and so forth), and so having others in
> > > /usr/share/doc/rfc is a little weird and unexpected.
> >
> > For you. Not for me. And I can't think why it would be for the users.
>
> Because after installing a package, they are used to looking in
> /usr/share/doc/<pkgname>?
>
> I expect that when I install a package named doc-xxxx, all if its
> content is going to be in /usr/share/doc/doc-xxxx. The Debian standard,
> whether spelled out in policy or not, supports such expectation.
That's a half true. Many packages install files in the doc directory of the
package being documented. /usr/share/doc/doc-rfc/ should only have a
changelog and a README. Besides, it would be nice to have many rfc packages:
doc-rfc-mail, doc-rfc-web, all of them puting packages in
/usr/share/doc/rfc. And there could be symlinkf pointing to the most recent
versions of standards: /usr/share/doc/rfc/HTTP would point to rfc2616.txt.
Reply to: