Re: Policy process (was: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?)
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > I don't think policy changes need to be seconded. We have a policy team
> > that should decide on what comes in policy and what not. Although, it
> > more looks like it's just 1 person doing all the work.
> > I sometimes feel that they go to slow which changing things, and I'm not
> > really sure it's a good or bad thing.
> > Some of those currently open bugs against the policy package, like your
> > ~ in version numbers, really shouldn't be a problem to get into the
> > policy. I don't think anybody has a problem with it. I think it's just
> > that no new version of the policy has been made yet.
> Well, policy-process is still shipped with the debian-policy package, and
> my experience in the past is that when I follow that process, the changes
> go into Policy fairly quickly. Certainly seconding would show that
> someone reviewed the wording of my proposed ~ patch and has confirmed that
> it sounds like an accurate and implementable description of their
As a debian-policy denizen, I am quick to second proposal I like.
However, here this a purely the description of what dpkg do.
What matter is whether the text is faithful to the implementation,
not whether I like it or not, and i don't feel qualified to vet the
However, there is at least 2 dpkg maintainers, they are very qualified
to check it, and I expected they would second the proposal.
If they did not see it, I suggest to forward it to them asking for
review and second.
Imagine a large red swirl here.