Packages guidelines: documentation subpackages name

[Christopher Stone]

On 5/14/06, Christopher Stone <chris.stone at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/14/06, Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta at iki.fi> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 17:12 +0200, Laurent Rineau wrote:
> > > At http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation we
> > > can read "it is recommended to use *-doc as the subpackage name", whereas in
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines we can read
> > > "- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -docs subpackage."
> > >
> > > So, could we agree on one policy? FC and FE seem to mix the two styles of
> > > naming. Looking at /var/cache/yum/{core,extras}/primary.xml.gz, if found in
> > > fe5:
> > >   30 "-doc"
> > >   19 "-docs"
> > > and in fc5:
> > >   16 "-doc"
> > >   5 "-docs"
> >
> > +1 to -doc.
> >
> > There's also -manual which could fall into the same category and
> > packaged just as -doc.  Someone will probably argue that -doc should be
> > reserved for subpackages and -manual for ones that are built from their
> > own SRPM, I'll say in advance that I disagree and the user doesn't
> > care :)
>
>
> According to the Package Review guidelines it should be "docs".
>
> - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -docs subpackage.
>

Whoops didn't read the whole thread, you can ignore my last message,
or just count it as +1 for docs ;-)