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

Re: RFC: doc files rework

Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> writes:

[analysis snipped]

I agree, myself I wondered several times why we did invent
this. Probably  because of the coexistence with tetex, but I'm not

> So I want to revise that mess, and propose the following:
> - all files are installed *as* in texlive, so under
>   /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/doc and .../texmf/doc

ACK, that's the best thing to do.

> - drop /usr/share/doc/texlive-doc


> - drop all files/links in /usr/share/doc/$package, maybe add only
>   a remark in README.Debian to use texdoc

I was prepring to write something about a Policy violation that would
prevent us doing this.  However, this is what policy actually says:

| Any additional documentation that comes with the package may be
| installed at the discretion of the package maintainer. Plain text
| documentation should be installed in the directory
| /usr/share/doc/package, where package is the name of the package, and
| compressed with gzip -9 unless it is small.

We hardly have any plain text documentation, and that little that is
there "should" rather be were the rest is and where texdoc finds it.

So yes, I totally agree with this proposal.  I would really add a remark
in README.Debian.

Regards, Frank

Reply to: