On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 03:28:40 +0000 Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> wrote: > In other words, somebody will be told "that bug's fixed in the > development version of this package upstream", so they go and try it > out. But, hey presto, not only does it ignore the configuration set up > while using the Debian package, but it also creates some new stuff in > the home directory that we had hypothetically promised to keep > pristine. I think this would be completely unacceptable. To avoid > this, we'd have to convince every affected upstream to do this before > we could implement it across the board. That's just not going to > happen without some momentum behind it, and general agreement from the > community, not just on some obscure Debian list, that it's a good > idea. I agree quite wholeheatedly with the above. I do think it's a decent idea, though. I have a much easier time navigating /etc than I do $HOME. That said, some form of concensus has to start *somewhere*. We have an army of DDs who regularily talk to their upstreams; if we come to a consensus here that it's a good idea, then we can start talking to them. (No, I wouldn't suggest changing Policy or trying to implement it before almost everybody upstream starts doing it on their own. But let's try and keep this thread focused on whether it's a good idea or not.)
Attachment:
pgpH6EhvqJVov.pgp
Description: PGP signature