Chris Waters wrote: > Therefore, this is a formal proposal to amend JoeyH's proposal as > follows: The existing menu heirarchy should be moved into policy
By existing menu hierarchy, do you mean the one I put in my proposal, or the one in the menu documentation? The one I put in my proposal is subtly different - all the menu entries are the same, but I rewoked the descriptions to be more general, so you don't have to try to intuit what goes in a menu by looking at examples of other programs that go there (not very helpful if you're not familiar with the example programs). I also added some text to the top to allow packages to add menu menus to leaf menus, which is current practice although not mentioned in the menu documentation. > Argument for this amendment: it's more specific than JoeyH's, it > outlines *exactly* what to do How is it more specific? If you'll revisit my proposal you'll see I stated the *exact* text I proposed to add. On the other hand I'm still not sure exactly what you propose to add. > and is therefore more suitable for a yeah-or-nay vote. If it comes to this we've failed. -- see shy jo
