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

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?

On Nov 22, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> I would also like to point out that change planning is the job of
> someone who wants to change something.  That includes not only:
I planned for everything that I could foresee.
I did not think about the buildds issue, but this is hardly the first 
time that some complex software/process has bugs that nobody tought 
about until it was deployed.
Actually I believe that the fact that this could be solved quickly and 
with a trivial change is a great argument in favour of the quality of my 
plan and work for switching to merged-/usr.

> We should back off at the very least until we have a transition plan
> which we can discuss and possibly get rough consensus on.  Personally
> what I have seen so far gives me little confidence.
You should have asked for an explicit plan three years ago when I first 
announced that I was working on this. At this point you are just 
creating arbitrary requirements that would delay forever this change.

The reality is that the usrmerge conversion program has been available 
for three years and all the conversion problems that were unconvered by 
users have been addressed.
If you have further doubts about its general viability then it is up to 
you to report specific issues.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: