[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: Both T and L are wrong, plea for something simpler (was: Re: Call for votes on init system resolution)

Hi Kurt,

Le jeudi, 6 février 2014, 21.19:36 Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 08:38:25PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > I'm guessing that under you're asking for the interpretation of
> > 
> > this in 6.1.1:
> > | In each case the usual maintainer of the relevant software or
> > | documentation makes decisions initially
> > 
> > And think that because the policy maintainers didn't try to make
> > any decision yet, the ctte can't make that decisions?

Yes. I stand to this interpretation, see below.

> I'm currently of the opinion that gnome made an initial decisions
> and as reaction to that they are setting policy and that this will
> be allowed under 6.1.1.

Back then, the gnome maintainers added a dependency on another package, 
which happened to be providing an /sbin/init. This was allowed by the 
Debian Policy of the time as well as by the Debian archive. The 
maintainers of the Policy maintainers haven't tried to rule on this at 
all since then. How is this matter now magically taken off the Policy 
maintainers' hands (while it _is_ a matter of Policy) and become a 
matter for the technical committee?

I feel compelled to write that I'm quite concerned to see technical 
committee members propose to rule on things they see fit, just because 
it's sufficiently important to their eyes. As I detailed in 
<1756169.he50hsLr7Y@gyllingar>, I'm quite firmly convinced that any 
ruling restricting software dependencies fails §6.1.1 (as the powers 
invoked), §6.3.5 and §6.3.6 at this point in time.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: