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

Re: should packages begin using /srv ?

block 340609 by 230217
block 340608 by 230217
block 311524 by 230217
block 315080 by 230217
block 336650 by 230217


On Wednesday 21 December 2005 19:05, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 13:13 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> [...]
> > Anyway, shall I file a bug against policy now, to include FHS 2.3 instead
> > of 2.1 ? I think I should. Otherwise it would look to me like the release
> > team can simply overwrite policy decissions.
> Three such bugs already exist, one with quite a lot of discussion on the
> issue.

These are merged and the most relevant one today is #230217, see 

The bug was opened two years ago, while the last post is four month old. 

Besides some, IMHO, smaller, problems, nobody objected and quite a few people 
seconded upgrading policy to FHS 2.3 - and _today_ we still have some time 
left til etch.

So how about upgrading the severity or take some other measures (usertags for 
example), so that this bug will not be forgetten but fixed in time ?

BTW, the fai maintainer said he will wait til this has been resolved before 
fixing #340609, #340608, #311524, #315080, #336650. (Which are serious (or 
should be) as they are against policy.)


Attachment: pgpbSO4ptWH9M.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: