Hello Thomas, I think you misunderstood what I meant. On 2021-01-07 14:41, Thomas Zimmermann wrote (excerpts):
Am 07.01.21 um 13:12 schrieb Johannes Meixner: ...
... you use the same directory names as in the old FHS. ... ... I think a new filesystem hierarchy should use new names
Please, no. This reinvents names for no good reason, and breaks muscle memory.
My "good reason" is that new and different things should use different names to make different things distinguishable. Please respond to what I wrote and explain why you think new and different things can/should still use old names.
Established convention. Consistency with other distros.
I think one cannot have something new and different and keep stablished conventions and consistency with the old stuff.
I'm all for improving the FS layout, but you won't improve things by inventing new names. Remember https://xkcd.com/927/
Only inventing new names would not improve anything and I am not talking about inventing new names to improve something. As far as I understand it Ludwig's proposal is not a backward compatible improvement of the FHS but something new and different. If Ludwig's proposal is a backward compatible improvement of the FHS, then new names would be wrong because a FHS compatible filesystem hierarchy should use FHS names. https://xkcd.com/927/ is not about backward compatible improvements but about different (even competing) standards. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Maxfeldstr. 5 - 90409 Nuernberg - Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nuernberg) GF: Felix Imendoerffer