Pet Peeve - Damaging Other people's work deliberately
mark at borkware.net
Fri Mar 10 13:00:40 UTC 2006
On Friday 10 March 2006 11:16, Nick Steeves wrote:
> On Thursday 09 March 2006 12:55, Mark Rosenstand wrote:
> > If documentation is nicely integrated with the application, as it's
> > the case with KDE, it isn't junk in my world either. Could we get a
> > comment (and maybe even action) from the KDE maintainer/packager?
> > :-)
> I've been considering how to breach to topic of the creation of
> /usr/share/doc for some time, and am actually kind of glad that it
> has become a community issue, and not just a personal inconvenience.
> To my knowledge, kde cannot simply be ./configur'ed to
> change /usr/share/doc to /usr/lib/kde3/doc, so it looks like a big
> "allow or disallow /usr/share/doc" decision.
I think /usr/share/doc is the right place for it (at least according to
the FHS which states "platform independant application data") - but the
location isn't the issue; it's the junk people tend to put in there :-)
> Would only core KDE stuff be permitted to install documentation, or
> would all KDE software be able to? For example, does anyone
> need/want amaroK's documentation? KOffice's? Smb4k's? BasKet?
I'd say all KDE applications because the "affects runtime" argument also
count for them. Actually I think it's more important for them to have
it since the docs for kde.org releases can be found on the net, but
that's far from the case for all the third-party applications.
More information about the CRUX