Re: Bug#42477: PROPOSED} delay the /usr/doc transition till after potato
On 10 Aug 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
>
> Santiago> If we followed this rule of "only object in extreme circumstances",
> Santiago> we could be drawing circles forever. See:
>
> On the contrary, if every one objected formally all the time
> we shall never resolve anything.
This has not happened in this case.
We decided to switch from FSSTND to FHS, which includes switching from
/usr/doc to /usr/share/doc, and nobody objected, so we had a consensus.
This issue is already resolved by current policy, which says to use
/usr/share/doc, with no special symlinks or anything.
> The moethod right now talks about,
> if there was no consensus, to call for a supermajority vote of
> 75%. Under you model of doing thnigs, votes shall never be required
> -- either everyone agrees, or if 4 people do not like vene one part
> of the proposal, it dies.
>
> I think that is unacceptable.
I don't have any special "model of doing things". I just think that we
reached a consensus when we decided to switch from /usr/doc to
/usr/share/doc. Now some people want to break the consensus and go back to
/usr/doc, and I consider this as a bad thing, because it breaks a previous
consensus. That's all.
If you think current policy procedures are unacceptable, please amend
them. I don't think it is necessary.
> I think we do need to exercise restraint in formal
> objections. If you are so sure that you are right, it should not be
> hard to convinve the others of your views. If you can't, then may be
> you are indeed the one whoi is ``wrong''.
Well, this particular issue seems to be a matter of (subjective) opinion,
more than an issue of being "right" or "wrong". Examples:
- "I think that mixing /usr/doc and /usr/share/doc is ugly"
- "I think that mixing /usr/doc and /usr/share/doc is not so ugly".
- "I think potato should be consistent".
- "I don't think mixing /usr/doc and /usr/share/doc will make potato
to be inconsistent".
- "potato will be frozen very soon"
- "potato will not be frozen very soon".
> I think that the current attitude of intellectual intolerance
> (I *must be right, and everyone else is obvioulsy wrong) would make
> the policy list ineffective.
The policy list is still effective for dealing with technical issues, and
I hope it will continue to be.
This issue, however, seems not to be very technical but quite subjective.
I wonder if the *technical* commitee has really something to say
about this.
Thanks.
--
"f67164dd8e28e231344e187266927c61" (a truly random sig)
Reply to: