Hi,
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
>> Nope, you don't get it.
How to win friends and influence people ;-)
Dale> As the rest of the committee seemed to take your proposal as
Dale> being "not to the point" I submit that I'm not the one who
Dale> "don't get it".
Dale> If it isn't "maintain the old location during the transition"
Dale> then please inform my ignorant self, as I may need to change my
Dale> vote.
There are two issues involved:
a) The principle of least surprise, which is the frustration involved
in reading the docs in two different locations. The symlink
solution addresses this
b) incremental upgrades to unstable packages from unstable, which
makes documentation not be accessable with tools such as dwww,
man, ect. Joey's stable upgrades solution addresses that.
The stable-upgrades solution has no impact on the former
problem, and the symlinks solution only addresses the latter in a non
optimal fashion. The symlink solution does have the side effect of
making (b) above less critical, though.
I never made (b) a part of my proposal either before the
policy list of before cebian-ctte, since I felt that a) was important
enough to require a solution, and it made (b) less time critical, and
we could deal with it by ensuring that all the packages in potato
dealt with /usr/share/doc.
The symlink solution would ensure that partial upgrades to
potato would work with man/info/whatever packages that had not been
upgraded, and since potato should have fixed packages, partial
upgrades from potato to woody would work as well.
Partial upgrades from slink to woody would have problems, but
adding stuff to slink-updates (Joey's proposal) would fix that.
With the symlink proposal adopted, Joey's proposal would only
be required for partial slink-->> woody upgrades.
manoj
--
In the next world, you're on your own.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
