2014-04-01 15:45 GMT+02:00 Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]>: > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Michael Biebl <[email protected]> wrote: >> 2014-04-01 8:44 GMT+02:00 Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]>: >> > To package maintainers: I'll begin to ship the doc as >> tarball-in-a-tarball >> > as we had agreed upon previously on the mailing list. >> >> Did we really decide on using tarball-in-tarball? That's a bit odd ime. >> >> > At least this is what I remember. There were those that didn't care if we > had two different tarballs and many more who preferred a single tarball > that included everything, even at the price of tarball-in-tarball.
Hm, using tarball-in-tarball makes it less convenient for me as packager. E.g. I need to unpack it explicitly, build it separately, patch handling becomes a bit odd. Unless the doc is properly integrated into the rsyslog sources / build system, I'd rather see a separate tarball then. _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE THAT.
