Hi guys,

While tidying up some packages before taking some time off I realized
that some packages like django-tables had binary packages that took
the convention of creating -doc packages using <binary package>-doc (a
very long time ago).

The result was the location of the doc changed from
/usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2-doc to
/usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2 with the bump to compat 11.

But now that we dropped the python2 binary package we end up with the
"main package" not being detected anymore and the doc moved back to
/usr/share/doc/python-django-tables2-doc.

The way I read the policy, it seems the -doc package should be <source
package name>-doc. Am I correct to read it this way? (it's not
specified that it's binary but not source package either so I just
want to make sure I get it right)

I see several possibilities on how to handle that:
 * leave it as is and it's fine (but doesn't match Policy 12.3)
 * overwrite dh_installdocs to pass --doc-main-package
 * rename the -docs package to match <source package>-doc and have the
ftp-master rm the old one
 * have dh_installdocs translate python into python3 package names
when looking for the main package

Which one do you think would be preferable? (I know there are multiple
python package in this case so it would be interesting to have a
consensus on how to handle it)
Other preferable solutions?

Thanks for your help,
Joseph

Reply via email to