Re: /usr/share/doc (was Re: weekly policy summary)
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Until the (quote: ``future version of policy'' comes out, the
> package in questin (wonko, unless you have forgotten), is in
> violation of the current policy version, (which, in this example,
> happens to be 188.8.131.52). Saying you are sticking to an older policy
> version is not an option.
Not an option? You're missing my point again. I've got packages
installed that are 2.4.0. In many cases, these are the latest,
up-to-date versions. Ok, my hypothetical Mr. A. S. Shole (the name
says it all) shouldn't have actually closed the bug, but there's no
reason why he couldn't ignore it for an indefinite amount of time,
possibly years. People *do* ignore policy changes for years, and they
could easily do so out of disagreement with a policy version as well
as through simple laziness. *That's* my point, and I apologise for
not being more clear, and for laying the blame for misreading on you.
But, given that, I think my original argument stands. It's too late
to ensure that everyone either sticks with /usr/doc or uses symlinks.
Which is too bad for my (pending) proposal as well as for yours. I'm
trying to be realistic here.
Chris Waters email@example.com | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or firstname.lastname@example.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.