Currently, votes are:
#0 #1 #2 #3 #4
Raul 2nd 1st
Manoj 2nd 1st 3rd
Dale 1st 3rd 2nd
Ian
Guy
Klee
Ian, Guy and Klee have not voted.
Because Manoj and Dale have voted with a different first preference
from myself, I'm retracting my "chairman's vote". At the moment, it's
not doing anything useful to resolve this matter quickly. That means
that if no one else takes action by Sunday that Manoj's "forest of
symlinks" proposal wins.
Here's a summary of what these ballot issues represent:
Ballot items:
0 further discussion
means we haven't decided anything yet
1 forest of symlinks
means every package gets changed so that it exports both /usr/doc/
and /usr/share/doc/. Implies that we're approving debian policy
3.0.x.x. Implies that packages and users which would refer to
/usr/share/doc/ can continue to refer to /usr/doc/.
2 leave things as they are
means we don't worry about user issues or user scripts, etc.
we just insist that every package which uses /usr/doc/ be
fixed before the release of potato. This implies that
either (a) we introduce some dependency mechanism so that
every package which exports /usr/share/doc requires that
packages those packages which refer to /usr/doc be upgraded
if someone does an apt-get install of a potato package on a
slink system, or else it implies that we'll have some release
notes with potato instructing people how to work around this
problem.
3 revert fsstnd->fhs directory changes, with advice
means that those packages which have been changed to provide
fhs directories must be changed back to fsstnd, and means that
the technical committee is going to spend some more time coming
up with a clean way of migrating.
4 alternate amended revision
means that those packages which have been changed to provide
fhs directories must be changed to continue to support fsstnd
only for the case of /usr/doc/.
--
Raul
