Bill Allombert wrote: > To give an example: Debian policy mandates that the file > /usr/share/doc/<package>/changelog.Debian.gz > exists. > Now perl subpolicy mandate that the perl module > Foo::Bar::Baz::Qux::Quux::Quuux::Quuuux > whic live in /usr/share/perl5/Foo/Bar/Baz/Qux/Quux/Quuux/Quuuux > be packaged as > libfoo-bar-baz-qux-quux-quuux-quuuux-perl, > which leads to the file > /usr/share/doc/libfoo-bar-baz-qux-quux-quuux-quuuux-perl/changelog.Debian.gz
I see. (Though I suspect that a perl module with more than, say, 80 characters in its name is pushing the boundaries of good taste already. It's hard to get to 239.) > I am not objecting to a limit being set. What I am objecting to is for policy > to forbid > something without providing guidance on how to deal with the issue. > > If you look at the section about software version, policy provides guidance > how to deal > with software without upstream version or non-increasing upstream version, it > does not > just state that this is forbidden, etc. Thanks for clarifying. I misunderstood before and I agree now. What _would_ be good advice in this case? For long filenames, one option is to build hierarchically named subdirectories. I confess that it's straining my imagination to come up with situations in which names approaching the limits would come up in practice that are not simply bugs. Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110303231840.GA12723@elie
