Packaging policy question

[Jack Neely]

Folks,

A question about some possible future changes to my OpenAFS packages.
Many folks that use/admin OpenAFS prefer the older paths (to
configuration/binaries) used by Transarc.  (The company that developed
and sold AFS that spun off from Carnegie Mellon University.)  These
paths are not FHS compliant.  Specifically, /usr/vice and /usr/afs.
Possibly /usr/afsws as well, but that seems deprecated by the OpenAFS
folks.

Would a sub-package providing symlinks to make some of the above paths
valid be acceptable in RPMFusion?  Perhaps, openafs-transarc.

Jack
-- 
Jack Neely <jjneely at ncsu.edu>
Linux Czar, OIT Campus Linux Services
Office of Information Technology, NC State University
GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4  EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89