You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
ypkg is incorrectly handling perl modules man3 files
It is incorrectly patterning out man3 pages into -devel packages that only have the man3 content
Recommended solution
Do not pattern out man3 pages for perl modules (I don't know if other packages might be affected by this policy that should not be)
Background and reasoning
In this commit man3 pages were patterned out to -devel packages.
While this might be technically correct, it is not useful for users installing perl modules to have the docs split out into a separate package, especially where that is the only thing in that package.
Workaround
add a patterns : /* stanza to keep everything in the main component
Note: The commit contains a comment that has a false assumption # This is almost always man files for api functions
Changes to policy like this should IMO have assumptions like that tested by searching through the repo. Not to lay blame, just to caution us going forward.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Summary
ypkg is incorrectly handling perl modules man3 files
It is incorrectly patterning out man3 pages into -devel packages that only have the man3 content
Recommended solution
Do not pattern out man3 pages for perl modules (I don't know if other packages might be affected by this policy that should not be)
Background and reasoning
In this commit man3 pages were patterned out to -devel packages.
While this might be technically correct, it is not useful for users installing perl modules to have the docs split out into a separate package, especially where that is the only thing in that package.
Workaround
add a patterns : /* stanza to keep everything in the main component
Note: The commit contains a comment that has a false assumption
# This is almost always man files for api functions
Changes to policy like this should IMO have assumptions like that tested by searching through the repo. Not to lay blame, just to caution us going forward.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: