Packaging/Review Guidelines change

[Ville Skyttä]

On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 20:53 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> /usr/share/xml is owned by several packages right now:
[...]
> Should new packages depend on xml-common instead of owning it

If they use something else than just expect the dir to be present from
xml-common, I'd say depend on it.  On the other hand, some of these own
it for cleanup-on-erase purposes (at least cvs2cl does, will fix), so
those can just have a dependency on the dir.  IMHO, it doesn't matter
that much if some others than xml-common own it, as long as it's not
unowned.  (Again assuming rpm's erase ordering issues will be fixed.)

>  or does /usr/share/xml really belong in filesystem?

FHS says it's optional and "must be in /usr/share, if the corresponding
subsystem is installed".  xml-common probably qualifies as such a
subsystem, and thus sounds like the correct package to include it in.
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SPECIFICOPTIONS15