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

Re: /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition, debate reopened



On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 06:07:55PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > Sure it's legal, but was it a good idea?
> 
> You could ask the same question from a different perspective: was it a
> good idea to change policy to use /usr/share/doc before the transition
> was hashed out?  And is it a good idea to leave it that way?
> 
> Perhaps the change should be reverted until we have a solution.

NO dammit!  We made our decision.  If we start second guessing every
implemented proposal the second it's implemented because it won't be easy
we will NEVER GET ANYTHING DONE!

I will say once again that I believe fully I was right before in
suggesting that joeyh and manoj simply decide how to handle the /usr/doc
mess and be done with it.  I suspect by no other method will we see an end
to this.


> > Do you want to argue that the
> > current state of the distibution is a Good Thing?
> 
> Well, I don't see any grave problems in having docs in two different
> places.  No essential part of the system breaks by that, it just causes
> some minor inconvenience.

inconvenience yes, minor no.  It's damned annoying.  But I'd live with it
if this issue is settled faster for it.

-- 
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org>             Debian GNU/Linux developer
GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC  44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77  8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
<n3tg0d> has /usr/bin/emacs been put into /etc/shells yet?  :P

Attachment: pgpeSkwRkO8tC.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: