Re: policy on editor/pager support
Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> writes:
> This seems much more complex than necessary. I don't see any reason that
> EDITOR and PAGER can't be guaranteed to exist on the system. (Have the
> base system provide them in /etc/profile)
First the user can unset them. Second as a matter of policy, programs
should work correctly without lots of environment variables. We
should keep /etc/profile as small as possible.
> The update-alternatives method requires that the program as permission to
> install itself as the "default", adding additional questions to the
> installation proceedure.
Alternatives are different from mime packages in that there are
built-in priorities. No questions from the user; update-alternatvies
just keeps the highest priority link.
> It is my feeling that this policy was not discussed in an adequate
> fashion. The fact that it made it into the policy manual without much
> review is troublesome to me. We need a better method for solidifying a
> proposed policy than the one we are using at the moment.
It was discussed extensively here before Ian proposed the current
policy. Later it was discussed on debian-policy. We already have a
fine system for solidifying proposed policy. Developers which are
interested in crafting policy should subscribe to debian-policy.
Guy
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: