Processed: Re: Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: tags 39830 - fixed Bug#39830: [REJECTED] get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks Tags removed: fixed retitle 39830 [AMENDMENT 30/10/2002] get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks Bug#39830: [REJECTED] get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks Changed Bug title. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
tags 39830 - fixed retitle 39830 [AMENDMENT 30/10/2002] get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks thanks On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:54:08AM +0100, Martin Godisch wrote: On Thu, Oct 28, 1999 at 16:26:50 +0200, Roland Rosenfeld wrote: I proposed to change the Manual pages section of our policy to get rid of the undocumented(7) symlinks. This proposal was seconded by Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] and Chris Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED], so I change the status to amendment now. I second this proposal. Why has it been rejected? I also second this proposal, and would like it to be revived. I would add to Roland's suggested diff that there are additional examples available in the /usr/share/doc/man-db/examples/ directory. Manoj said with regard to this proposal: # The second set of commands clear out old and stalled proposals # out of the policy BTS. I am labeling them fixed, rather than closing # them, since people may wish to resurrect some of these proposals. Here's an updated version of Roland Rosenfeld's diff: --- policy.sgml.orig2002-10-30 10:51:25.0 + +++ policy.sgml 2002-10-30 10:58:10.0 + @@ -7476,22 +7476,26 @@ page included as well. /p - p - If no manual page is available for a particular program, - utility, function or configuration file and this is reported - as a bug to the Debian Bug Tracking System, a symbolic link - from the requested manual page to the manref - name=undocumented section=7 manual page may be - provided. This symbolic link can be created from - filedebian/rules/file like this: - example compact=compact -ln -s ../man7/undocumented.7.gz \ - debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man[1-9]/varrequested_manpage/var.[1-9].gz - /example - This manpage claims that the lack of a manpage has been - reported as a bug, so you may only do this if it really has - (you can report it yourself, if you like). Do not close the - bug report until a proper manpage is available./p +p + There must be a manual page at least for every program. If + no manual page is available, this is considered as a bug and + should be reported to the Debian Bug Tracking System (the + maintainer of the package is allowed to write this bug report + himself, too). Do not close the bug report until a proper + manpage is available.footnote + p + It is not very hard to write a man page. See the url + id=http://www.schweikhardt.net/man_page_howto.html; + name=Man-Page-HOWTO, ttman(7)/tt, the examples + created by ttdebmake/tt or ttdh_make/tt, or the + directory file/usr/share/doc/man-db/examples/file. + /p + /footnote + To avoid duplicate bug reports about missing manual pages, + you should inform the user that you know about the missing + manual page in + file/usr/share/doc/varpackage/var/TODO.Debian/file. + /p p You may forward a complaint about a missing manpage to the This proposal has already been proposed and seconded several times (proposed by Roland Rosenfeld in [EMAIL PROTECTED], seconded by Chris Waters in [EMAIL PROTECTED], by Chris Lawrence in [EMAIL PROTECTED], by Martin Lodisch above (are you a developer?), and by me in this message), so assuming that those people still agree then it's an amendment. I propose a two-week discussion period. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpTCh7W80bA6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:09:25AM +, Colin Watson wrote: Here's an updated version of Roland Rosenfeld's diff: [...] + There must be a manual page at least for every program. If This would make it an RC bug if no man page exists. I don't think that's what we want. (I know it's not what I want.) Change must to should and I'll renew my second. -- Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra-osis is too long [EMAIL PROTECTED] | microscopicsilico-to fit into a single or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | volcaniconi- standalone haiku pgpohcBSeQsBd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 03:37:27AM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:09:25AM +, Colin Watson wrote: Here's an updated version of Roland Rosenfeld's diff: [...] + There must be a manual page at least for every program. If This would make it an RC bug if no man page exists. I don't think that's what we want. (I know it's not what I want.) Change must to should and I'll renew my second. Oops, you're quite right. Roland's diff preceded the must/should cleanup. Here's an updated version: --- policy.sgml.orig2002-10-30 10:51:25.0 + +++ policy.sgml 2002-10-30 10:58:10.0 + @@ -7476,22 +7476,26 @@ page included as well. /p - p - If no manual page is available for a particular program, - utility, function or configuration file and this is reported - as a bug to the Debian Bug Tracking System, a symbolic link - from the requested manual page to the manref - name=undocumented section=7 manual page may be - provided. This symbolic link can be created from - filedebian/rules/file like this: - example compact=compact -ln -s ../man7/undocumented.7.gz \ - debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man[1-9]/varrequested_manpage/var.[1-9].gz - /example - This manpage claims that the lack of a manpage has been - reported as a bug, so you may only do this if it really has - (you can report it yourself, if you like). Do not close the - bug report until a proper manpage is available./p +p + There should be a manual page at least for every program. If + no manual page is available, this is considered as a bug and + should be reported to the Debian Bug Tracking System (the + maintainer of the package is allowed to write this bug report + himself, too). Do not close the bug report until a proper + manpage is available.footnote + p + It is not very hard to write a man page. See the url + id=http://www.schweikhardt.net/man_page_howto.html; + name=Man-Page-HOWTO, ttman(7)/tt, the examples + created by ttdebmake/tt or ttdh_make/tt, or the + directory file/usr/share/doc/man-db/examples/file. + /p + /footnote + To avoid duplicate bug reports about missing manual pages, + you should inform the user that you know about the missing + manual page in + file/usr/share/doc/varpackage/var/TODO.Debian/file. + /p p You may forward a complaint about a missing manpage to the -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpmjzVY3R3Eu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:09:25AM +, Colin Watson wrote: + To avoid duplicate bug reports about missing manual pages, + you should inform the user that you know about the missing + manual page in + file/usr/share/doc/varpackage/var/TODO.Debian/file. Why not just remove this or add a note reminding users to check the BTS before filing bugs? There's no great point in having that list in addition to BTS bugs, particularly when the list contains information that can readily be autogenerated. -- You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever.
Bug#167004: gnome-wm
Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 20:53, Colin Walters wrote: I just made a full policy proposal. I think it should make everyone happy. http://bugs.debian.org/167004 Christian, could you look over it? The policy maintainers indicated to me on IRC that they would only add it to policy after it had been integrated, so if you are in agreement, I will commit support to our gnome-session CVS for it, and supply patches to the metacity and sawfish packages. I disagree with that. Users already don't know how to setup the default x-window manager, and now you want to introduce an new update-alternative... I think the best choice is to increase the value to 30 or 40 if a window manager complies with the Window Manager Specification Project and keep only one alternative for window manager. Christian
Bug#167004: gnome-wm
On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 09:29, Christian Marillat wrote: I disagree with that. Users already don't know how to setup the default x-window manager, and now you want to introduce an new update-alternative... Well, changing the alternatives is really only for advanced users. We should advise users to use the WINDOW_MANAGER environment variable. I think the best choice is to increase the value to 30 or 40 if a window manager complies with the Window Manager Specification Project and keep only one alternative for window manager. Ok, I had thought that the maximum priority was 50, but it seems sawfish is already 70, so I guess that works. All I really care about is that a user installing the x-window-system and desktop tasks doesn't have GNOME start up with twm. It looks like a priority increase of 40 would work. Do you want to put together a patch?
Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:56:35PM +, Mark Brown wrote: On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:09:25AM +, Colin Watson wrote: + To avoid duplicate bug reports about missing manual pages, + you should inform the user that you know about the missing + manual page in + file/usr/share/doc/varpackage/var/TODO.Debian/file. Why not just remove this or add a note reminding users to check the BTS before filing bugs? There's no great point in having that list in addition to BTS bugs, particularly when the list contains information that can readily be autogenerated. Makes sense. If the maintainer wants to do that kind of thing, fine, but it's up to them. --- policy.sgml.orig2002-10-30 16:13:24.0 + +++ policy.sgml 2002-10-30 16:14:13.0 + @@ -7476,22 +7476,22 @@ page included as well. /p - p - If no manual page is available for a particular program, - utility, function or configuration file and this is reported - as a bug to the Debian Bug Tracking System, a symbolic link - from the requested manual page to the manref - name=undocumented section=7 manual page may be - provided. This symbolic link can be created from - filedebian/rules/file like this: - example compact=compact -ln -s ../man7/undocumented.7.gz \ - debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man[1-9]/varrequested_manpage/var.[1-9].gz - /example - This manpage claims that the lack of a manpage has been - reported as a bug, so you may only do this if it really has - (you can report it yourself, if you like). Do not close the - bug report until a proper manpage is available./p +p + There must be a manual page at least for every program. If + no manual page is available, this is considered as a bug and + should be reported to the Debian Bug Tracking System (the + maintainer of the package is allowed to write this bug report + himself, too). Do not close the bug report until a proper + manpage is available.footnote + p + It is not very hard to write a man page. See the url + id=http://www.schweikhardt.net/man_page_howto.html; + name=Man-Page-HOWTO, ttman(7)/tt, the examples + created by ttdebmake/tt or ttdh_make/tt, or the + directory file/usr/share/doc/man-db/examples/file. + /p + /footnote + /p p You may forward a complaint about a missing manpage to the -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpw8bRvN6Kgq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#167004: gnome-wm
Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 09:29, Christian Marillat wrote: I disagree with that. Users already don't know how to setup the default x-window manager, and now you want to introduce an new update-alternative... Well, changing the alternatives is really only for advanced users. We should advise users to use the WINDOW_MANAGER environment variable. Setting an environment variable under Gnome is for advanced users too. Maybe we can wrote an capplet for that ? I think the best choice is to increase the value to 30 or 40 if a window manager complies with the Window Manager Specification Project and keep only one alternative for window manager. Ok, I had thought that the maximum priority was 50, but it seems sawfish is already 70, so I guess that works. The maximum is 70 for complient freedesktop window manager (See policy 12.8.4) The priority for metacity is actually 40 All I really care about is that a user installing the x-window-system and desktop tasks doesn't have GNOME start up with twm. It looks like a priority increase of 40 would work. Do you want to put together a patch? I that case, yes. Christian
Bug#167004: gnome-wm
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:50:55AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 09:29, Christian Marillat wrote: I disagree with that. Users already don't know how to setup the default x-window manager, and now you want to introduce an new update-alternative... Well, changing the alternatives is really only for advanced users. We should advise users to use the WINDOW_MANAGER environment variable. Well, the main problem we have now is that upon installation of gnome2 over gnome1, most users find themselves using twm, while there where used to having sawfish before. All you are trying to do is using some workaround/configuration/whatever for this. Would it not be better, following the gnome2 philosophy and all, to fix the problem instead ? Basically, it would be nice if one of the gnome packages asked a debconf question about this, and set the x-window-manager accordyingly. You could ask something of the kind : Gnome 2 works best with either sawfish or metacity. you have currently both installed, please choose one. or you have neither installed, twm (or whatever) will be used as default wm. If there is a ewmh-window-manager virtual package, you can even depend on it and so get ride of the second question. This would solve all the problem first time gnome2 installer are seing. Altough gnome2 with twm is a fun thing to see, if you don't know how to change window manager it is a rather lame gnome2 experience you will have. At least a debconf note saying you can use the alternative-update trick to change windows manager would be nice. I think the best choice is to increase the value to 30 or 40 if a window manager complies with the Window Manager Specification Project and keep only one alternative for window manager. Ok, I had thought that the maximum priority was 50, but it seems sawfish is already 70, so I guess that works. All I really care about is that a user installing the x-window-system and desktop tasks doesn't have GNOME start up with twm. It looks like a priority increase of 40 would work. Do you want to put together a patch? If that solves the problem, then fine. Friendly, Sven Luther
Bug#167004: gnome-wm
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 03:29:09PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote: Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Christian, could you look over it? The policy maintainers indicated to me on IRC that they would only add it to policy after it had been integrated, so if you are in agreement, I will commit support to our gnome-session CVS for it, and supply patches to the metacity and sawfish packages. I disagree with that. Users already don't know how to setup the default x-window manager, and now you want to introduce an new update-alternative... I think you're missing the point. If eczema-window-manager (or whatever this is called is introduced, and gnome depends on and uses this instead of x-window-manager, then users won't have to know anything! It'll Just Work(tm). Here's the scenario: twm and metacity are both installed. Now, twm wins the race for x-window-manager, because it's a better qualified standalone window manager than metacity. However metacity wins the race for eczema-window-manager, because twm isn't in that race, so when gnome starts, and runs eczema-window-manager, the user gets metacity. No knowledge by the user is required, and everyone's happy. (And BTW, I think desktop-window-manager might be a better name.) I think the best choice is to increase the value to 30 or 40 if a window manager complies with the Window Manager Specification Project and keep only one alternative for window manager. No. Such compliance only helps if you're using a window manager with one of these desktop environments. You're going to face fierce (and well-deserved) opposition to any such proposal. -- Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra-osis is too long [EMAIL PROTECTED] | microscopicsilico-to fit into a single or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | volcaniconi- standalone haiku
Bug#167004: add ewmh-x-window-manager alternative, drop EWMH section from priority, add virtual package ewmh-x-window-manager
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 08:41:44PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: It turns out that just bumping the priority of x-window-managers like metacity which implement the EWMH spec isn't enough. Other window managers like twm still take priority, mainly because they support the Debian menu system directly (which metacity doesn't, it relies on the GNOME panel to do it). So I think what we really need is an ewmh-x-window-manager, that packages like gnome-wm can use to explicitly invoke a window manager which supports the EWMH spec. Ugh, I don't like this. Please just play with the scoring of EWMH support instead. Depends: metacity | ewmh-x-window-manager | x-window-manager? Ugh. -- G. Branden Robinson|I'm sorry if the following sounds Debian GNU/Linux |combative and excessively personal, [EMAIL PROTECTED] |but that's my general style. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |-- Ian Jackson pgpHnifPJfHJr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 06:02:42PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:09:25AM +, Colin Watson wrote: + It is not very hard to write a man page. See the url + id=http://www.schweikhardt.net/man_page_howto.html; + name=Man-Page-HOWTO, ttman(7)/tt, the examples + created by ttdebmake/tt or ttdh_make/tt, or the + directory file/usr/share/doc/man-db/examples/file. Now weren't you just telling me a couple of weeks ago not to go by man(7) because it documents obsolete constructs? I'm just more-or-less copying the original diff in an attempt to minimize contention. Evidently it didn't work. :) Like the Man-Page-HOWTO, it's better than nothing, and worse than the best. Many things are. However, the best in this case is generally terse technical documentation, which is fine if you really want to know how the macro sets work but less good if you want to provide an introduction for novices. groff_man(7) and the info documentation, regrettably, are not really at the novice level. I think it's OK to refer people to man(7) and fix its deficiencies as we go along. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#39830: [AMENDMENT]: get rid of undocumented(7) symlinks
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 03:37:27 -0800, Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:09:25AM +, Colin Watson wrote: Here's an updated version of Roland Rosenfeld's diff: [...] + There must be a manual page at least for every program. If This would make it an RC bug if no man page exists. I don't think that's what we want. (I know it's not what I want.) Change must to should and I'll renew my second. I don't know the point of must and should, since it is the release manager who decides which bug is RC. -- Oohara Yuuma [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian developer PGP key (key ID F464A695) http://www.interq.or.jp/libra/oohara/pub-key.txt Key fingerprint = 6142 8D07 9C5B 159B C170 1F4A 40D6 F42E F464 A695 Let's cry that we do not have a clue. --- Junichi Uekawa, diary 2002/8/17
Bug#167004: gnome-wm
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:39:22PM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 03:29:09PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote: I think the best choice is to increase the value to 30 or 40 if a window manager complies with the Window Manager Specification Project and keep only one alternative for window manager. No. Such compliance only helps if you're using a window manager with one of these desktop environments. You're going to face fierce (and well-deserved) opposition to any such proposal. Look, any desktop environment worth its salt provides session management functions, and thus one of its packages can register itself as an x-session manager. Once that is done /etc/X11/Xsession gets out of the way and hands control over to the session manager. The session manager can then do whatever it likes to determine which window manager should be run, probably using x-window-manager as a final fallback before erroring out with a complaint that it could find window manager at all. This solution would completely eliminate the need for any policy changes. However, it may be a less than obvious solution because some of the x-display-manager package maintainers in Debian refuse to use /etc/X11/Xsession as the default X session script. -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | De minimis non curat lex. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | pgpHwbrffmUr3.pgp Description: PGP signature
