Hello, On Wed 26 Feb 2025 at 01:41pm GMT, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 20:33:46 +0800, Sean Whitton wrote: >> I believe that there is a procedural issue which trumps the substantive >> issue about merging or not merging [/usr/bin with /usr/games] > ... >> I would encourage those of you most interested in the merge to do an MBF >> requesting the merge be performed for all the affected packages, and >> then we can undo this again. > > You're talking about this in terms of a "merge", but I think both the > existing Policy wording and the change you're proposing are about the > extent to which executables with different functionality in /usr/bin/ and > /usr/games/ are allowed to have the same name, like /usr/bin/pacman (Arch > Linux's package manager) and /usr/games/pacman (a maze-navigation game), > and that's not quite the same thing. > [...] > What I would like to avoid here is having maintainers feel that they > should reject attempts to resolve naming collisions with reasoning like > "this is part of a merge like the /usr-merge and I didn't like the > /usr-merge", because I think resolving naming collisions in the PATH is > a good goal in its own right, independent of whether any more directories > get merged. I agree. I shouldn't have typed "merge'. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
