On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 03:05:47AM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote: > > While everybody involved in this discussions sits and goes in circles, the > > rest of the project is going to pass -policy by and just impliment policy > > as it states in the policy manual and by the time the people who get to > > decide actually decide, it'll be harder to implement due to the number of > > packages that DID move... > > > > In the end, the people in the /usr/doc vs. /usr/share/doc discussions need > > to start compromising and coming together and coming to a solution before > > the whole discussion is rendered meaningless by non-policy-reading > > maintainers takeing matters into their own hands... > > Not at all. > > They will not need to take back any changes. They will need to add some > kind of compatibility to their packages. e.g. if we choose the symlinks > solution they will need to add the little code that creates/removes the > symlink. > The step this people have taken is in the right direction. It's just that > they are exposing how annoying this issue is without proper handling. That's premature to say. You're assuming that the decisions isn't to hold off on the transition, or put the files into /usr/doc with the symlink in /usr/share/doc... Or any of a dozen other posibilities... -- Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also. ========================================================================= * http://benham.net/index.html <gecko@benham.net> <>< * * -------------------- * -----------------------------------------------* * Debian Developer, Debian Project Secretary, Debian Webmaster * * <gecko@debian.org> <secretary@debian.org> <lintian-maint@debian.org> * * <webmaster@debian.org> <gecko@fortunet.com> <webmaster@spi-inc.org> * =========================================================================
Attachment:
pgpgrYzzu4Pl1.pgp
Description: PGP signature