Re: unreproducable bugs
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 11:35:14 +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <email@example.com> said:
> On 20050717T025707-0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> A little reading comprehension on your part would help a bit
>> here. Hint: dict policy would help.
>> The discussion started wuth a wuestion of _policy_. Once you
>> comprehend what that word means, you'll see what Thomas meant.
> I distinctly remember you arguing that Policy is not a stick to beat
> people with. How then, in your opinion, could the mere mention of
> the word "policy" imply wanting to enforce anything?
I can see what you mean about reading comprehension. I say
that when people want to put things into policy to beat people in the
head with. You see, then something is in policy, you are supposed to
pay attention to it, since otherwise there is no point in having
a policy at all.
Secondly, not all policy in the world, or even in Debian, is
in the Debian technical policy document; indeed, the unadorned word
policy still has meaning, commonly accepted as in the wider world.
> Assume the best possible motivations, please. In this case, it
> could go a long way if people would read "policy" as "the DDR" when
> such a reading makes a question make perfect sense (and, if they
> must, politely correct the error). Some people actually did that.
Yeah, it could also go away if people read "policy" to mean
the movie I saw yesterday. However, if you want to communicate,
people need to have a common understanding of what a word
means. Unless, like Clinton, your sentences depends on what the
meaning of the word "is" is.
As to good intentions, the road to hell is paved with good
intentions; and the good intent is no reason to suspend critical
It will be advantageous to cross the great stream ... the Dragon is on
the wing in the Sky ... the Great Man rouses himself to his Work.
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C