On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 09:27 -0500, Tommy Reynolds wrote: > 2. The "noarch" RPM's actually contain the source; that's more a > "src.rpm" or "-devel.noarch.rpm" to me. Don't we need room in the > namespace for a PDF / HTML flavor of the RPM? Perhaps > "foo-html.noarch.rpm"? Any objections to having the rpm contain all flavors? Seems like less hassle with that approach. But we could benefit from standardizing on the location of how those files get dropped onto the system. How about the following: /usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang/ # chunked html /usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.html # nochunk html /usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.pdf # pdf /usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.txt # plain txt /usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.omf (perhaps a symlink from /usr/share/omf or vice-versa) Thanks, James Laska -- ========================================== James Laska -- jlaska@xxxxxxxxxx Quality Engineering -- Red Hat, Inc. ========================================== -- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
