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

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

>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:

 Santiago> I would like you to elaborate on that.

        I doubt that planning for a controlled transition is going to
 slow the transition down. Not releasing potato cause we are still not
 done and had not planned on the transition may well make us the only
 distribution running out of date software.

 Santiago> I think it makes sense that the more difficult the
 Santiago> migration process is, the longer it will take, and your
 Santiago> proposal complicate things in a considerable degree.

        Considerable degree? Are you sure you are talking about people
 who are Debian maintainers? 

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

        You may well be one of the few who object to adding a stanza
 to a couple of maintainer scripts, when the stnaza is well
 know (and thus does not even have to be written from scratch).

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

        I am sorry, but you have no idea about what you are saying. We
 have seen transitions in the past. Wishful thinking is all very well,
 but we have a distribution to produce.

        I think there is no point belabouring this line. You think
 adding a stanza to maintainer scripts is too mucxh work, despite the
 evolutionary and partial change it allows, you think that if we all
 just wished hard enough the changes can be done before releasing

        There is way too much difference in our positions for this
 debate to be fuitfull.

 Dear Mister Language Person: I am curious about the expression, "Part
 of this complete breakfast".  The way it comes up is, my 5-year-old
 will be watching TV cartoon shows in the morning, and they'll show a
 commercial for a children's compressed breakfast compound such as
 "Froot Loops" or "Lucky Charms", and they always show it sitting on a
 table next to some actual food such as eggs, and the announcer always
 says: "Part of this complete breakfast".  Don't that really mean,
 "Adjacent to this complete breakfast", or "On the same table as this
 complete breakfast"?  And couldn't they make essentially the same
 claim if, instead of Froot Loops, they put a can of shaving cream
 there, or a dead bat?  Answer: Yes. Dave Barry, "Tips for Writer's"
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E

Reply to: