For some time I've been working under the assumption that executable documentation is a bad idea. rpmlint complains when documentation generates dependencies, and these dependencies are often needless bloat. Lately I'm getting pushback when asking for a quick chmod -x of docs. The usual argument is "It's an example, it's supposed to be executable." Currently I don't see anything in the guidelines that would forbid this as long as it doesn't cause extra dependencies. So, is there concensus that allowing documentation to be executable is OK? Or is it something that should be prohibited. - J< -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
