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

[Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <gaia@iki.fi>]

On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 09:53:24AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> We had a consensus.  Those people now wanting to undo the change had
> plenty of opportunity to cause the change to never happen in the first
> place.

ITYM "Those people now wanting to have a decent transition method
had plenty of opportunity to devise one before the change had made."
Now, if people feel that the decision which was made (move /usr/doc
to /usr/share/doc with no particular planned transition) is incorrect,
it should be either corrected or reverted.

> Arguably we did realize after we agreed to do it that it wouldn't be so
> easily done.  For that reason, we started to turn our attention to how's.

And while we argue, it would be useful to revert the change from the
policy documents for now.

-- 
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % gaia@iki.fi % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%

   "... memory leaks are quite acceptable in many applications ..."
    (Bjarne Stroustrup, The Design and Evolution of C++, page 220)