Re: FHS - transition
Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
> On 16 Oct 1998, Adam P. Harris wrote:
> > I think, say, filiing important bugs on the relevant packages would
> > suffice to ensure that the issue is fixed prior to the release.
> > Clearly I'm not proposing to do this now -- no, only once we've
> > resolved to transition (gently) to FHS.
> Ok, could we then upgrade those bugs to "normal" at least?
>
> They are not just "things that would be nice to have implemented"
> (wishlist). We really *need* to have them fixed in the near future.
> Otherwise we will never move to FHS.
Woah there, one step at a time. I'd like to see (a) a proposed
appendix to the Packaging Manual about handing the FSSTD->FHS issue,
or else a separate file in the packaging-manual package; and finally
(b) general consensus, i.e., "this is the best way to do it" on (a);
and finally, (c) a proposed policy amendment.
Only once all that is done, can we start filing serious bugs.
Just MHO.
.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: