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 |