I'm changing my vote to: 1st preference: 2' leave things as they are >>with advice<< [with advice refers to my ballot update email earlier today -- basically it means release notes and an "fhs" package which would be part of potato.] 2nd preference: 3 revert fsstnd->fhs directory changes, with advice 3rd preference: 0 further discussion 4th preference: 1 forest of symlinks At the moment, I'm not casting my chairman's vote. OPINION: The primary issue I'm concerned with here is how long I think that it will take to release an acceptable potato: 2' touches the fewest packages, and I think it's acceptable, so it should be the quickest. 3 touches more packages, and would possibly result in the best technical outcome, but at the moment no one but me appears to want to vote for this item -- and as I said before, potato latency is what I see as the key issue. I'm not going to have as my first preference an item which no one else will support -- that's just inviting more latency. 0 doesn't really decide anything. I think that if our vote settles on this that we're just dumping the issue back on Wichert. 1 touches every single package, which in my opinion would take a painfully long time. However, the change it specifies is at least very specific. I don't think it's a very good solution because it results in a very different transition plan for /usr/doc than from /usr/man when (at least in principle) some of the transition work should apply to both aspects of the migration. If you disagree with me, please speak up and spell out your reasons. If you agree with me, please vote accordingly so we don't keep stalling everyone else. Thanks, -- Raul
Attachment:
pgp49wETfzzOE.pgp
Description: PGP signature