Dear Sean, On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> wrote: >> > 2. You should patch the "New versions" and "Installation" sections out >> > of the texinfo file, as these could be confusing to Debian users who >> > already have the package installed and will obtain new versions from >> > us. Don't forget a DEP-3 patch header. >> >> Umm... I don't think so. >> I should not install the info file into the verilog-mode package, with your >> advice. Because I believe that Debian source package having big patches >> is a bad manner. >> Already the installation of the info file is removed at the git repo. > > I strongly disagree. We should install documentation with our > packages, so that users can use learn how to use the package without an > active Internet connection. > > It is perfectly normal to remove installation and upgrade information > from documentation by means of a large patch. For example, see these > patches to ocrmypdf and flycheck: > > https://browse.dgit.debian.org/ocrmypdf.git/tree/debian/patches/patch-docs-for-Debian.patch > https://browse.dgit.debian.org/ocrmypdf.git/tree/debian/patches/path-to-docs-for-Debian.patch > https://browse.dgit.debian.org/flycheck.git/tree/debian/patches/patch-README-for-Debian.patch
Thanks. It's first time to see this real example for me. I wrote a patch "texinfo-for-Debian.patch" which is passed by checking cme: ``` $ cme check dpkg-patches cme: using Dpkg::Patches model loading data checking data check done $ cme check dpkg cme: using Dpkg model loading data Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done checking data check done ``` Could you review it? Best regards, -- Kiwamu Okabe at METASEPI DESIGN
