| Summary: | [FUTURE EAPI] inclusion of HACKING in einstalldocs default DOCS array | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Hosted Projects | Reporter: | Adam Feldman <np-hardass> |
| Component: | PMS/EAPI | Assignee: | Package Manager Specification <pms> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | esigra |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 174380 | ||
|
Description
Adam Feldman
2016-06-09 04:52:11 UTC
Inclusion of HACKING had already been considered for EAPI 4, back in 2009: https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/f4ddcba50e95187833f8a756af1f6107 At the time, a long and a short version of the default list were suggested: README* ChangeLog AUTHORS NEWS TODO CHANGES THANKS BUGS FAQ CREDITS CHANGELOG README Change{,s,Log} AUTHORS NEWS TODO ABOUT THANKS {KNOWN_,}BUGS SUBMITTING HACKING FAQ CREDITS PKG-INFO HISTORY PACKAGING MAINTAINER{,S} CONTRIBUT{E,OR,ORS} RELEASE ANNOUNCE PORTING NOTES PROBLEMS NOTICE The shorter version then was accepted, and I don't see a good reason why we should (even partially) revise that decision. Especially, if it concerns less than 1% of the tree (the quoted message says 370 ebuilds). After all, the above list is only a default, and it is easy to override it by assigning DOCS, or by calling "einstalldocs" (or "default") followed by "dodoc HACKING" in src_install(). (In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #1) > Inclusion of HACKING had already been considered for EAPI 4, back in 2009: > https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/ > f4ddcba50e95187833f8a756af1f6107 > At the time, a long and a short version of the default list were suggested: > > README* ChangeLog AUTHORS NEWS TODO CHANGES THANKS BUGS FAQ CREDITS CHANGELOG > > README Change{,s,Log} AUTHORS NEWS TODO ABOUT THANKS {KNOWN_,}BUGS > SUBMITTING HACKING FAQ CREDITS PKG-INFO HISTORY PACKAGING MAINTAINER{,S} > CONTRIBUT{E,OR,ORS} RELEASE ANNOUNCE PORTING NOTES PROBLEMS NOTICE > > The shorter version then was accepted, and I don't see a good reason why we > should (even partially) revise that decision. Especially, if it concerns > less than 1% of the tree (the quoted message says 370 ebuilds). Bear in mind, that that number is only those that have explicitly chosen to install it. Who knows how many theoretically have that file. > > After all, the above list is only a default, and it is easy to override it > by assigning DOCS, or by calling "einstalldocs" (or "default") followed by > "dodoc HACKING" in src_install(). Good tips, thanks. No problem. Just seemed odd to me (not knowing the history of the default DOCS) that a relatively common file in the FOSS world was being omitted. Feel free to close this if no one else has anything else to add one way or the other. I assume the two original lists were based on a statistic of documentation files installed by existing ebuilds, with different cut-off levels. Unfortunately, the 2009 posting doesn't provide any numbers (it only says "I got the default list by some horrid shell voodoo"). We can of course reiterate the list, but that should be based on traceable criteria for inclusion of entries (like, X% of ebuilds install a such a file). Closing for now. |