Test of Docs Packaging

[Tommy Reynolds]

Uttered "Paul W. Frields" <stickster at gmail.com>, spake thus:

> Right.  If you update your docs-common module again, you'll get the new
> stuff to package fedora-doc-common.

Paul,

Two issues have slowly emerged from the recesses of my mind (which is
always in recess, if you get my drift). Forgive me if they have
already been discussed:

1.  This all looks quite compilated to leave in Makefile.<whatever>.
    Do you think that packaging this as a shell script would be
    cleaner and easier to maintain?  Just use the same
    Makefile.common technology I used for the i18n conversion to
    generate the per-language targets and pickle off the shell script
    from there.

2.  The "noarch" RPM's actually contain the source; that's more a
   "src.rpm" or "-devel.noarch.rpm" to me.  Don't we need room in the
   namespace for a PDF / HTML flavor of the RPM?  Perhaps
   "foo-html.noarch.rpm"?

Late to the party, but Cheers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20051013/93bcdd38/attachment.bin