Jérôme Marant wrote: > Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Josip Rodin wrote: > >> Think harder. :) A user runs man x-window-manager once, sees something, > >> later the alternative gets changes to another WM for whatever reason, they > >> run man x-window-manager again, see another thing, confusion ensues. > > > > editor(1) and pager(1) and www-browser(1) are already provided by at > > least some apternatives for those programs. If this is really a problem, > > which I don't think it is. Instead I think that slave links for > > alternatives is common practice, and I have seen no confused users > > because of it. > > So, would you second my proposal?
Well, I note that none of editor(1), pager(1), or www-browser(1) are mentioned in policy at all. I might second a proposal to document them in policy and add x-window-manager(1) too. -- see shy jo
pgppysl6FrY8n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
