Sean Whitton wrote: > On Sat 07 Dec 2024 at 04:45pm -08, Josh Triplett wrote: > > Anecdata aside, one other way to evaluate this is to look at the type of > > files packages store under /usr/share/locale. > > > > A look at the Contents file gives a complete list of what types of files > > packages store there, which in turn indicates how they're used: [...] > > Thanks very much for the analysis. LGTM. > > > Based on that, I think it's very unlikely that a single bug will arise > > from adding this policy change. I think it'd be safe to say "must" here. > > But if people would nonetheless like this changed to "should", I can do > > that. > > Well, I was thinking, would it really be a bug of RC-severity for *any* > package that didn't work, if /usr/share/locale is deleted? > For example, a package that is for use on workstations that didn't work > properly would matter less than something for containers.
That's a fair point, though I think it's a reasonable *eventual* goal to say that all software should cope with it being missing, since in practice that should be true for any software that also automatically picks up *new* installed translations. Also, I think "workstation" isn't quite the category of less concern. Rather, I think it doesn't matter as much for *desktop* software, for instance. I think it'd be fine if (for instance) a desktop environment didn't function without locale information installed, but it'd be important for (for instance) typical command-line tools or development toolchains. In any case, I'll change it to a "should", fix the typo in the commit message, add a summary of the analysis I did, and resend, seeking seconds. - Josh Triplett
