Am 17/02/2015 um 17:34 schrieb Ingo Weinhold:
The main argument for having a ~/config/non-packaged instead of a ~/config/packaged is that almost all software people use will be packaged. Therefore it is just consequent to keep the paths of the majority of installed software short and convenient.
The majority of software will be installed in /system. ~/config will probably be mostly empty.
Also this keeps the structure of /boot/system and /boot/home/config consistent.
That's a good argument for keeping the status quo.Another for changing ~/config to ~/config/packaged would be that all read-only directories would be put together into a single place, and there would be no surprise what is writable, and what isn't.
Currently, I find this not very intuitive. That's also a UI problem, though, but changing how it works would definitely improve things a lot.
Regarding how this decision affects old software: Software that is still maintained or whose source is available is not relevant to this discussion, since it should be packaged properly anyway to provide the best user experience.
+1. Bye, Axel.
