On 17 Oct 1998, Adam P. Harris wrote: > Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...] > > They are not just "things that would be nice to have implemented" > > (wishlist). We really *need* to have them fixed in the near future. > > Otherwise we will never move to FHS. > > Woah there, one step at a time. I'd like to see (a) a proposed > appendix to the Packaging Manual about handing the FSSTD->FHS issue, > or else a separate file in the packaging-manual package; and finally > (b) general consensus, i.e., "this is the best way to do it" on (a); > and finally, (c) a proposed policy amendment. > > Only once all that is done, can we start filing serious bugs.
Ok, this sounds very reasonable to me. Clearly we need a general consensus, and clearly we do not have such thing (yet). Thanks. -- "892ac5187008c4c2822d384603ab119c" (a truly random sig)