Currently XaraLX-examples installs into: /usr/share/doc/XaraLX/examples This is incorrect, if a program installs into the /usr/share/doc space it should include the version number: /usr/share/doc/XaraLX-0.7/ or it could also (perhaps preferably) into: /usr/share/XaraLX/ Many other applications install their example files into the /usr/share/ space such as LyX, e.g.: /usr/share/lyx/examples/
Not sure this is actually a bug, but I'll seek guidance. The contents of the doc package has not actually changed since Xara 0.2, so it was felt during the review that it should remain as unassigned to any particular version (hense the lack of -0.7 at the end of the name). It's not a major change to alter the spec file, but I'll see what others come up with.
That's why I suggest /usr/share/XaraLX/ which is for data that isn't specific to a particular version /usr/share/doc/ is for documentation specifically for each version, if you look in there you'll see that every directory has the specific version of the app. Most apps like this put data into /usr/share/<appnam>/ rather than /usr/share/doc/<appname>/
>Currently XaraLX-examples installs into: >/usr/share/doc/XaraLX/examples >This is incorrect, if a program installs into the /usr/share/doc space it should >include the version number: >/usr/share/doc/XaraLX-0.7/ IMO, it's not (necessarily) wrong to install into a non-versioned dir under /usr/share/doc.
In my /usr/share/doc/ there are only 3 directories that aren't versioned: audacity (from audacity from livna, which is probably actually a bug) HTML (from fedora-release-5-5 which is used to hold system-wide docs) packages (from kdelibs-3.5.3-0.4.fc5) In this case it's particularly confusing when there are two directories almost the same: /usr/share/doc/XaraLX /usr/share/doc/XaraLX-0.7/ lyx for example puts it's example files into /usr/share/lyx/examples as many other packages do. That's why I suggest /usr/share/XaraLX/. (Or less optimally: /usr/share/doc/XaraLX-0.7/)
> In my /usr/share/doc/ there are only 3 directories that aren't versioned: There are a few other packages that use unversioned directories, including (but not limited to) qt4, Macaulay2. >In this case it's particularly confusing when there are two directories almost >the same: >/usr/share/doc/XaraLX >/usr/share/doc/XaraLX-0.7/ *Shrug*. To me, this simply implies that the stuff in XaraLX-0.7 is version-specific, whereas the items under XaraLX is not.
I think I'll side with Rex on this and mark this as not a bug. If though one of the FESCo cheeses advises both Rex and myself are wrong, I'll re-open the bug
There should probably be some kind of policy or information on the packaging guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines on this.