For what it is worth, one could include
the demos as a separate sub package (for example -demos, or -samples) and
would be very useful to include. Let me know if you need help with
a spec file update - I may be able to cobble together an example.
From:
Rex Dieter <address@hidden>
To:
address@hidden
Date:
05/27/2015 02:13 PM
Subject:
Re: [XForms]
xforms on epel - no doc rpm
Sent by:
address@hidden
On 05/26/2015 02:31 PM, Jens Thoms Toerring wrote:
> Hi Rex,
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 02:00:39PM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
>> On 05/26/2015 12:25 PM, Frank Cox wrote:
>>> I notice that the xforms rpms on epel are xforms and xforms-devel.
>>>
>>> The xforms-doc rpm (with all of the example code and whatnot)
is not there.
>>
>> Neither fedora (or epel) ever shipped a xforms-doc pkg as far
as I'm
>> aware. Is this an implicit request that it should? If
so, what
>> content should it contain exactly? Stuff from demos/ ?
>
> No, the demo programs aren't the documentation,
OK, I won't include demos/ (even though the embedded xforms.spec in the
tarball does exactly that).