For some time I've been working under the assumption that executable
documentation is a bad idea. rpmlint complains when documentation
generates dependencies, and these dependencies are often needless
Lately I'm getting pushback when asking for a quick chmod -x of docs.
The usual argument is "It's an example, it's supposed to be
executable." Currently I don't see anything in the guidelines that
would forbid this as long as it doesn't cause extra dependencies.
So, is there concensus that allowing documentation to be executable is
OK? Or is it something that should be prohibited.