Re: Bug#40706: usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

On 19 Jul 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

>  Santiago> I will not insist *all* packages must move to
>  Santiago> /usr/share/doc, but those who do not are buggy anyway (with
>  Santiago> or without this proposal).
> 
>  Santiago> I think it is *this* proposal what will slow down the
>  Santiago> transition to FHS.  If we do not make symlinks, transition
>  Santiago> period will be much shorter, and many more packages will be
>  Santiago> converted by the time potato is released.  Considering that
>  Santiago> packages using /usr/doc are currently buggy because we have
>  Santiago> already accepted FHS, this means potato will have less bugs
>  Santiago> if we do not make any symlinks.
> 
>         I disagree with this hypothesis.

I would like you to elaborate on that. I think it makes sense that the
more difficult the migration process is, the longer it will take, and your
proposal complicate things in a considerable degree.

Volunteering to maintain my packages will not reduce the total manpower
required to switch to FHS. I'm not the only volunteer in the project.

If you are so willing to offer your help, then maybe we have an
opportunity to have potato fully[*] FHS compliant by following current
policy, without any additional symlinks. I'm convinced that this may be
done quite quickly, but only if we have the will to do it quickly.

Thanks.

-- 
 "8ad0090940f726ba0eb126c1cd87bd6f" (a truly random sig)