On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Roland Rosenfeld wrote: > Do we really have to discuss this again? We asked the technical > 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)). In woody (potato+1) every package has to place its > documentation in /usr/share/doc/<package> with a symlink > /usr/doc/<package> pointing to /usr/share/doc/<package>. In woody+1 > the symlinks have to be removed.
I think policy does not explicitly mention woody or woody+1. We could well make /usr/share/doc mandatory in the bug sense at the same time we allow (but not mandate) symlinks to disappear. Of course, this is something to be discussed after potato release. Thanks. -- "e96cf3daf338bd6fc2bb7e6cc54801d6" (a truly random sig)
