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

Re: Info Problem

on Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 10:59:01PM +0000, Colin Watson (cjwatson@debian.org) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 08:33:22AM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:

> > As does DocBook and man.  Deprecating man in favor of Info is _not_
> > acceptable.  Period.  Nor does it meet Debian policy.
> The latter isn't an argument, I'd note, more an observation of fact.
> The rest of the world doesn't have to follow Debian policy, and we can
> change it if we think it's a good idea to do so. (Not that I think
> that in this case, as 'apt-cache show man-db' should indicate.)


> > I've spoken to Brad Kuhn about this specifically.
> ISTR speaking to him about it once myself, but can't remember the
> outcome. Did you get anywhere?

Well, for values of "anywhere" equalling "take it up with Richard", yes.
But no specific movement.  Among the reasons for polishing my man vs.
info debate was preparation for a formal proposal.  Which still hasn't
happened.  But could.  Think it's worth a try?

> The GNU project's attitude to man pages is one of the reasons why I
> decided that man-db should not be a GNU package, the other being that
> copyright assignments would be a headache since one of the former
> maintainers is dead.

Yes, but dead men contest no bug reports ;-)

On a more practical note:  copyright would pass to the estate and heirs.
It's possible (not necessarially easy) to get assignments in this case.
The GNU project also prefers assignments, but hasn't been 100% hard-line
on pursuing them in all cases (mostly to their regret).  This based on
conversations with Eben.


Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    STATE OF THE ART Expensive, loud and fragile. Occasionally functions for
    brief periods. In computer hardware terms, the "art" may be pottery
    - l'Inq                                       http://www.theinquirer.net/

Attachment: pgpaYeCSsM_9G.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: