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

Bug#106073: status of this bug?

On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 03:51:31PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > We had another discussion on where to put the contents of -doc packages
> > separate from the bug report in which a degree of consensus was reached,
> > but I can't seem to find it now. I'll keep searching...
> Thanks, I'm interested.
> Anyway that consensus isn't actually reflected in the current policy, is
> it?

No. There are several issues involved that were discussed on several
occasions over the years, but the main thing seems to be whether and in
what amount is the extra /usr/share/doc/<package>-doc directory structure

Some proposed moving -doc package copyright and changelog files into
/usr/share/doc/<package>/<file>-doc or so. I think this breaks the
consistency and should be resorted to only if we can't do anything better.

Some proposed mandating that -doc package contents is placed into
/usr/share/doc/<package>/, and that the administrivia such as copyright and
changelog stays in /usr/share/doc/<package>-doc/. This sounds good to me
because it has a sort of an internal logic, the -doc suffix only exists
because of packaging, it's actually the docs for <package>. Plus, it's
shorter, less to type.

>From strolling the archives, I get the impression that the majority shares
this sentiment, with one downside: someone might wander into the -doc/ dir
and wonder where are the docs. This can be easily alleviated by placing a
symlink from /usr/share/doc/<package>-doc/<package> to
/usr/share/doc/<package>. I know that there are people who wouldn't like
such an extra link, but I don't believe there are people who would actually
object to making everything consistent just because they have to add an
extra symlink.

I would recommend that we have policy suggest ("may") the latter solution,
and see how it goes from there. Any objections?

     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to: