[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: Packaging (Was: Naming convention)

From: Jim Busser
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: Packaging (Was: Naming convention)
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:58:55 -0700

On 8-Sep-09, at 3:20 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:

Can it be renamed in the tarball to

        etc/gnumed/mime_type2file_extension.conf (no example)

This would make it appear as if it ought to get installed

and can the upstream source in cvs perhaps also lose the "example"

I'd rather advise to keep the .example and put it into

When files contain actual working code (or values on which working code depends) please forgive if it is naive to place copies of things like .conf files in docs.

If we would be talking files with code which may not need to be used, perhaps there are two scenarios:

Scenario 1. when there already exists within the system a file which we may rather not overwrite when we are not sure. In this case it can be attractive to supply a file of alternative name in the same directory if only for ease of access. However in such a case when we are talking an original system file maybe the "disabling" extension could better be .gnumed

e.g. sources.conf.gnumed

Scenario 2. when there exists no original system file, and we are talking only a gnumed-specific file which may or may not need to be used


such files could instead be provided in the tarball in


and this could alternatively also be the place to keep files from Scenario 1 (better than etc/gnumed ) when a gnumed "substitute" file may not need to be used

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]