> > > 1. I subtly avoided those by specifying doc-xxxx rather than xxxx-doc :-) > > > FWIW, I think we ought to come to agreement about the proper behaviour: > > > right now I don't know *where* to look after installing foo-doc. > > > > Here the solution is clear to me. A package mutt-doc documenting mutt > > should put its files under /usr/doc/mutt, i.e. where a user will go to find > > mutt documentation. > > That makes sense, except that my usual sequence is this: > > 1. Look for docs in /usr/doc/foo -- nothing there. > 2. apt-get install foo-doc -- success. > 3. Since I just installed foo-doc, I tend to look in /usr/doc/foo-doc for > the new materials. Silly me. > > There doesn't seem to be policy on this...maybe there should be. > > One argument for putting it in .../foo-doc is that if I want the docs > without foo, perhaps to see if I want to install it, or if I need/want > the docs on a different machine than I need/want the package (think > firewalls...)
Think this: Do the docs document the docs? /usr/share/doc/mutt documents mutt, but /usr/share/doc/mutt-doc... documents... what? mutt-doc? Is a nonsensical place for documentation, I think. It only has some sense from a package management perspective, but that's not ok, package manage should be invisible to the end users, and things shoould fall in the most intuitive place... I M H O. =)
