On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Gaetan Bisson <[email protected]> wrote: > [2012-03-23 10:28:30 -0500] Dan McGee: >> Just curious- is there any reason to introduce naming changes like >> this other than personal preference? > > Only that I work better with sets of PKGBUILDs with a consistent style; > sorry for the inconvenience.
No big deal, I made it sound worse than it was- just wanted to point out a specific case where it can be an inconvenience on users (e.g. me) that customize things. >> I don't agree with this. Either ship the documentation unzipped, or >> don't ship it. It is rather useless to people otherwise, IMO. > > Okay then, I just won't ship it: unzipped, it takes 91% of the installed > size, and is not used by the vast majority of users. Just kill them; people that need them know how to find them on the Internet. This was our philosophy 5 years ago and not sure why we strayed away from it for non-man or non-info stuff. Also of note- even though compressing it seems to make sense, it can easily make the overall package compression suffer. We already have this issue with manpages. -Dan
