Bug#42477: PROPOSED} delay the /usr/doc transition till after potato

[Mike Goldman <whig@by.net>]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:

> Hi,
> >>"Mike" == Mike Goldman <whig@by.net> writes:
>
>  Mike> Given then a choice between automatically moving all docs back
>  Mike> to /usr/doc or moving all legacy packages to /usr/share/doc, I
>  Mike> would choose the latter, since this is compliant with FHS which
>  Mike> is our eventual goal.
>
>         So you have a preference. However, apart from similarily bague
>  ``forward moving'' vs ``step back'' arguments, you have said little
>  about this proposal -- certainly little that can be classified as a
>  technical flaw.
>
>  Mike> Therefore, I formally object to this proposal.
>
>         And yet, you are moving to close all debate on this issue!!!
>
>         Look, people, the guidelines call for a *vote* on
>  disagreement, and ask for a 75% supermajority. Thus the expectation
>  was that, at least theoretically, motions could pass with as much as
>  24% of the people disagreeing. Yet if everyone keeps jumping in with
>  technical objections, and grinding all progress on this forum down by
>  having all proposals killed, I think we need to come up with some
>  changes.
>
>         Firstly, one needs to emhpasize that formal objections are
>  only to be used as a means of last resort, and then only if
>  all other means of reconcilliation have been exhausted. Disagreeing
>  with a proposal should not be enough.
>
>         I was hoping we don't have to disallow formal objections, or
>  to restrict them to fatal technical flaws in the proposal, but if
>  people are going to frivoulously kill all discussons and votes with
>  them, something has to change.
>
>         manoj
>  hoping that some of the recent objections shall be withdrawn on their own

I withdraw my formal objection.