John Marino wrote on 11/15/2015 15:47: > On 11/15/2015 3:39 PM, Andrey Chernov wrote: >> As I already say, I don't want to insist on any particular point of view >> in such area as human behavior. I just say that it is POLA violation >> (even while it is upgrade) and we can let users decide by themselves, >> what it best for them (without me at least). > > I am starting to think "POLA" as an acronym is subject to abuse. By > this definition, *any* change would "astonish" a user (picturing the > most incompetent user impossible too). > > POLA is meant for unreasonable and unexplained changes. I don't think > tidying up locales for the first time in a decade is unreasonable or > unexplained. > > Let's not dilute "POLA". It's pretty good but you can apply it to anything. I agree. Everytime FreeBSD is changing something in the base, there are voices with "POLA". Removing Perl from base, removing BIND from base... these were more significant changes than changing something in locales. Miroslav LachmanReceived on Sun Nov 15 2015 - 15:11:00 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:01 UTC