Re: Conflicts between developers and policy
- To: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>, Buddha Buck <bmbuck@acsu.buffalo.edu>
- Cc: Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>, Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>, debian-policy@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Conflicts between developers and policy
- From: Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:36:21 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] 19980501183621.X1819@test.legislate.com>
- Mail-followup-to: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>, Buddha Buck <bmbuck@acsu.buffalo.edu>, Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>, Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>, debian-policy@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 87g1itwv8k.fsf@tiamat.datasync.com>; from Manoj Srivastava on Fri, May 01, 1998 at 04:12:59PM -0500
- References: <"qB8SiB.A.FmE.1_bS1"@murphy> <[🔎] 87g1itwv8k.fsf@tiamat.datasync.com>
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com> wrote:
> Policy should be followed, except where a discussion about the clause in
> question is still ongoing, in which case the maintainer may indulge in a
> policy violation if they feel it is a technically superior
> approach.
Hmm.. this is actually an important and interesting concept.
In effect, you've elevated "a technically superior approach" to policy
status, and delegated all of policy to a mere plan for achieving that.
What you've left out is what the technically superior concept
approaches.
Could you perhaps suggest what it is that could be used to distinguish
between worthwhile and non-worthwhile forms for technical genius?
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: