Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-10-11
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 23:35:47
Message-Id: CAGfcS_kGnjEEeJvK9B5uEiMTDWS_RMt6NGTfZNfWtysMqcoBXw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-10-11 by hasufell
1 On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 6:13 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote:
2 > On 10/18/2015 11:18 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
3 >> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
4 >>> Following up to this. I think the choice is between the two extremes
5 >>> of keeping the status quo and of changing all non-FHS locations, or
6 >>> some intermediate solution.
7 >>
8 >> The value of keeping the status quo is that it is the status quo, IMO.
9 >> Tweaking it makes it no longer the status quo and it just means lot of
10 >> change for questionable value (again, IMO).
11 >>
12 >
13 > Not keeping status quo means:
14
15 My point wasn't that we should keep the status quo, but rather that if
16 we're going to make a change we should just go to the most sensible
17 design possible, and not just tweak a few things here and there.
18
19 I think this is one of those situations where compromise may not make sense.
20
21 --
22 Rich