On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:15:58PM -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote: > Maybe more like this:
> "See also the XDG Base Directory specification (ref), which sets a > number of conventions intended to organize users' home directories. The > XDG Base Directory specification is recommended, but not mandated." I think it's reasonable to provide a reference to the XDG spec, but I object to making this a recommendation of the FHS. First, because I think this is scope creep; if we're not actually going to define this as part of the FHS itself (and I don't think we should because it's not particularly "heirarchical"), then I don't think we should be pointing elsewhere to recommend it either. Second, because I think the XDG spec has done an inadequate job of addressing the migration concerns for the myriad existing applications and installations that use "legacy" dotfiles and dot dirs, and it's not at all recommendable that applications migrate to XDG dirs without a careful and very long-term transition. So please drop this comment about the XDG spec being "recommended". Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ fhs-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss
