continuing conversation from UDS-N - Application Review Board

[Micah Gersten]

On 11/16/2010 02:21 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
> On 11/16/2010 12:08 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> IIRC, FHS expects /opt/<vendor>/<package>.  Perhaps Canonical should register
>> "canonical" if they haven't already and then allocate /opt/canonical/quickly
>> or /opt/canonical/arb namespace to this.  Given the way FHS anticipated /opt
>> to be used, I think Canonical (although certainly not ideal) may be the best
>> choice.
> /opt/canonical has a similar problem to /opt/ubuntu, in implying 
> "officialness" or support from someone (in this case Canonical as a 
> company, rather than Ubuntu as a community/project/distro).
>
> But, there seems to be a fundamental tension here between "official 
> enough to register with LANANA" and "not too official", so perhaps an 
> added level in the path is the best solution, like /opt/ubuntu/extras. 
> It is specified in the FHS "The structure of the directories below 
> /opt/<provider> is left up to the packager of the software..." with 
> /opt/<provider>/<packagename> as a suggestion, not a requirement.
>
> Allison
I thought that any support for these packages would be coming from
Canonical and not the community.

Micah