With that firmly in mind > It may be wise to stop throwing in non - helpful personal inflamatory asides : I.E.I hope this isn't going to degenerate into a flame war.
What the root level configuration folder was named is totally irrelevantwith its cryptic and unhelpful names, is (a miserable failure of)
Example - Why is MarkS being targeted to defend any viewpoint - AFAICS he is only one of several who have
stated logical disclaimers of original contentions - others then jumped on band-wagon to berate present standards as
Evil - insane ...on & on > to what good for the community at large ?
As was stressed - I may not agree -but will defend anybodies right to discuss anything - if done in non-inflamatory...
Or as MarkS POLITELY noted should be presented in non- pejorative mode. ?
What was important - a standard usable for all -
" Why " (etc) was chosen folder name becomes evident -
The long standing 'NIX tradition of names indicating purpose
E.G. "Less" is more - "Born(e)-again command interpreter - break -cut -diff and then"gawk" > EVAL- =
Look at all CLI names. - Figure it out for yourself
Where to store most system configurations = etc etc etc !
If a user wants everything just "lumped" to-gather ~ use static libraries
Don't like something - CHANGE IT Who the ---- has restricted any of your rights to do so ?
Of those who may have the ability - Who here has done so ?
How many have extensively used Linux before "discovering" Puppy !
If the fits of shoo - irritates = change of foo-ware may be needed -( Please - don't blame the Chandelry supplier if ) you are See -sic