C. P. Ghost wrote:

We either evolve or be in a stalemate forever.

Mounting on a directory (/tmp) does *not* clear that directory, so automatic
data loss will not occur.

Adrian Chadd wrote:

Yes, it would be a total of ~20 years before we finally decided to switch to
using TMPFS for /tmp.

Changes that potentially break the POLA can be categorized; a change has a
combination of the following properties: (1) the change fixes a bug (ie., the change is about something that should have
been different in the first place, eg., the change fixes the misspelling of a
command name) (2) the change can be prepared for (ie., enough time is given for the user base
to slowly switch the new method of doing things) (3) the change is evolutional (ie., the change is based on a decision to yield a
net benefit (not necessarily a benefit in all cases)) (4) the change has priorly been given room (ie., is expectable as defined by
standards and the documentation)

The TMPFS-for-/tmp change obviously falls into (4), and surely into (3). With
the support of UPDATING entries, release notifications, and perhaps
announcements, the change also falls into (2). Furthermore, using TMPFS for /tmp
is analogous to adding assert()s to code. Noone is really breaking the POLA that
much. The TMPFS-for-/var/run should not even bother anyone.