Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-03-01 Thread Michał Górny
Dnia 2014-02-28, o godz. 15:59:35 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org napisał(a): -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Samuli Suominen: On 28/02/14 13:15, Patrick Lauer wrote: On 02/27/2014 09:08 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: Hi everyone, I'm putting the call out there for

[gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread hasufell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Samuli Suominen: On 28/02/14 13:15, Patrick Lauer wrote: On 02/27/2014 09:08 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: Hi everyone, I'm putting the call out there for any agenda items for the next Council meeting, which will be held on March 11, 2014 at

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread Rich Freeman
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:59 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Despite that... the answer is already here: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/filesystem/index.html Gentoo does not consider the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard to be an authoritative standard, although much of our

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread William Hubbs
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 03:59:35PM +, hasufell wrote: *snip* Despite that... the answer is already here: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/filesystem/index.html Gentoo does not consider the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard to be an authoritative standard, although much of our

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread David Leverton
William Hubbs wrote: The reason the split happened is pretty straight forward, and every other justification for continuing it was come up with after the fact. I keep hearing this, but I really don't see how it's relevant. I'm sure you'll find lots of things in your life that you use for

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread William Hubbs
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 09:57:15PM +, David Leverton wrote: William Hubbs wrote: The reason the split happened is pretty straight forward, and every other justification for continuing it was come up with after the fact. I keep hearing this, but I really don't see how it's relevant.

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread Alon Bar-Lev
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:03 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 09:57:15PM +, David Leverton wrote: William Hubbs wrote: The reason the split happened is pretty straight forward, and every other justification for continuing it was come up with after

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread David Leverton
William Hubbs wrote: And I would argue that the maintenance cost of having separate /usr in a general sense is much higher than the benefit it provides. That's a legitimate point (not that I necessarily agree or disagree as I'm not the one who's tried to make it work) - perhaps I should have

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread William Hubbs
On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 12:24:02AM +, David Leverton wrote: William Hubbs wrote: And I would argue that the maintenance cost of having separate /usr in a general sense is much higher than the benefit it provides. That's a legitimate point (not that I necessarily agree or disagree as

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread Wyatt Epp
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 7:47 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Patrick thinks that all configuration files belong in /etc, and what has happened is, some packages are placing default configuration files in /lib or /usr/lib and allowing them to be overridden by files with the exact

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread William Hubbs
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 09:47:05PM -0500, Wyatt Epp wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 7:47 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Patrick thinks that all configuration files belong in /etc, and what has happened is, some packages are placing default configuration files in /lib or

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread Joshua Kinard
On 02/28/2014 7:47 PM, William Hubbs wrote: On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 12:24:02AM +, David Leverton wrote: William Hubbs wrote: And I would argue that the maintenance cost of having separate /usr in a general sense is much higher than the benefit it provides. That's a legitimate point (not

Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS or not (WAS: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11)

2014-02-28 Thread Samuli Suominen
On 01/03/14 02:18, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:03 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 09:57:15PM +, David Leverton wrote: William Hubbs wrote: The reason the split happened is pretty straight forward, and every other justification for