My impression has been that a README in that location was required (since that thread occured), which is why it is listed as required in setup.html.
I don't particularly care either way , but I think that _consistency_ is a very good idea, and that we should either bitbucket all those readme's (remember there is still /usr/doc/pkg-version/ ) or make it mandatory. And if we get rid of the README's, then a basic man page should be mandatory. Rob === ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Faylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 5:10 AM Subject: Re: Robots binary package > On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 10:48:29AM -0500, Jonathan Kamens wrote: > >> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:52:25 -0500 > >> From: Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> Your reference doesn't say that _ALL_ packages need a README. > > > >Quoting from <URL:http://cygwin.com/setup.html#package_contents>: > > > > In your binary package, include a file > > /usr/doc/Cygwin/foo-vendor-suffix.README containing (at a minimum) > > the information needed for an end user to recreate the package. This > > includes CFLAGS settings, configure parameters, etc. > > I've never thought about this before but it makes no sense to me to have > rebuild instructions in the binary package. That's just cluttering up > the disk space for 99% of the people who install the package. > > I could see the need for some kind of description about what the package > is, but even there, I think that a man page would suffice. I agree with > Corinna that there should be no absolute need for a README. > > Of course, I would say that because none of my packages have READMEs > either... > > cgf >
