1 |
On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 08:28:32PM +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: |
2 |
> It will require a lot of documentation updates (wiki, handbook etc) so I |
3 |
> wonder if you don't need symlinks for the grub2* names for a while even |
4 |
> so to ensure compatibility for a deprecation period. New users aren't |
5 |
> expected to have seen all the news items, so that alone isn't enough |
6 |
> until the documentation is updated, and docs can't be updated until the |
7 |
> change has happened itself as itself would be a mismatch. |
8 |
|
9 |
If I were to put symlinks in place keeping the grub2 names, people |
10 |
would still see the documentation as correct, and more documentation |
11 |
could be created using the grub2 names, so the symlinks would have to be |
12 |
kept, so no, I don't see the value in symlinks in this case. |
13 |
|
14 |
> What is the expected gain from such a change? |
15 |
|
16 |
The expected gain is one less gentoo-ism. Upstream calls the commands |
17 |
grub-foo, so we should do the same by default. |
18 |
|
19 |
William |