On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Roland Rosenfeld wrote: > On Sun, 09 Jan 2000, Anand Kumria wrote: > > > > Who is expecting 0 here? We expect this for Debian 2.3, but not > > > for potato. In potato we expect, that every documentation is > > > available as /usr/doc/<package> (documentation either placed there > > > or accessible via a symlink to /usr/share/doc/<package>). > > > No, we expect 0 here. > > Do we really have to discuss this again? We asked the technical
I am not questioning the details here. My inital email was "Does anyone else have a similair number of directories and /usr/doc" and "should I file a lot of bug reports against those which do". You are managing to turn a molehill into a mountain. The answers are "yes, lots of other do" and "no, I shouldn't". > committee some time ago to decide how to smoothly migrate from > /usr/doc to /usr/share/doc and the decision was that every package has > to provide /usr/doc/<package> in potato (either as a directory (for > old packages) or as a symlink to /usr/share/doc/<package> (for new > packages)). That is not what policy 6.4 says. It says that on a symlink from /usr/doc/<package> to /usr/share/doc/<package> is valid. Earlier it says that the Standards_Version: of .deb files will be used to file bugs if it gets to out of date with respect to the current one. Here is an additional question: what standards release(s) will be allowed in potato? Anand
