On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:49:06AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > * For every Ruby package, you can generate its documentation using > RDoc. If you keep the license in the original place, the generated > documentation will cover it, if you move it somewhere else, it will > be missing from documentation. > Might make sense to copy at least the LICENSE file to docdir (using %doc LICENSE), That installs two copies but will be quite handy to system admins who know their unix conventions but not ruby conventions and need to quickly access this sort of information. README and things that are about usage of the library I'm more ambivalent about. We seem to have two places where different sets of people would look. I think the ruby developers would be more interested in the usage instructions so their conventional location makes sense. OTOH, admins often have to make small changes to installed files to diagnose things or fix bugs. When that happens, they're surely going to be cursing the placement of the ruby documentation in a place they aren't expecting. Seems that we can't win that one. > * Metadata of the gem may refer to the documentation files. However I > do not expect any issues in this area. > > * Sometimes happens, that there is VERSION file which is referenced > by code, which might cause broken behavior or library. > VERSION cannot be marked as %doc at all then. Anywhere it is marked as %doc needs to be fixed. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpNw1qglrtKl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
