Re: Is an MBF and unblock for packages introducing new files in /bin or /sbin or /lib in Bookworm acceptable at this stage?
On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 23:07, Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Luca" == Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> writes:
>
> >> I suspect the reason you want to make this MBF is that you
> >> believe it
> Luca> will somehow make the transition easier if there are fewer
> Luca> files in /bin or /usr/bin.
>
> Luca> IE, you immediately escalated it with aggressiveness followed
> Luca> by baseless accusations verging on the conspiratorial.
>
> I regret that my second statement came across as an accusation and
> certainly that you heard it as a conspiracy.
> I'd like to be heard differently.
> My understanding at the time (which you have since corrected) is that
> you were making the proposal because you believed it would make a
> transition to canonical paths easier.
> In my mind that would be a good reason for advocating for such a
> transition.
> That is the spirit in which I made the assumption about your reasoning.
> Again, I regret that you heard things in a different tone.
>
> I read your original message as a valuable contribution that in my
> analysis I thought was a bad idea because of the dpkg disappearing file
> bug.
Thank you for your clarification, I think the example you brought up
is worth considering. Do you feel that Étienne's suggestion of
documenting it in the place where such a change would necessarily have
to take place so that it can't be missed (e.g.: the install file)
would be an adequate safeguard?
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi
Reply to: