On 19 November 2012 21:46, PJ Eby <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 19 November 2012 19:26, PJ Eby <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should use some clearly-distinct (and mutually exclusive)
>>> terminology going forward:
>>>
>>> * Data files: stuff the user can and/or should change, such as
>>> configuration files, startup databases, etc.
>>> * Resource files: constant files used at runtime, regardless of file type
>>>
>>> Data files should never be installed to package directories.  But I'm
>>> not aware of any good reason why resource files should ever be installed
>>> anywhere *else*.
>>>
>>
>> +1. But there's a third "type" of file, which is worth listing
>> separately, just to clarify:
>>
>> * ??? files: constant files that are *not* typically used at runtime
>> (documentation, for example)
>>
>> Maybe "support files" would be a good name?
>>
>
> Can you think of any such *besides* documentation?  'Cause if
> documentation is the only thing, then we should just call it that.  ;-)
>

:-) No, to be honest, I can't. But I'm not an expert - the Linux distro
people probably know a lot better than I do what types of files give them
trouble. But if documentation's the only case then yes, definitely call it
that.

Paul.
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  [email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Reply via email to