Bug#741573: Requesting input on TC deliberations about menu system and policy
[I think that what follows is entirely redundant with what I wrote earlier.]
Le Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 08:32:58PM -0400, Sam Hartman a écrit :
>
> Steve claimed that the policy process is not a rough consensus process
> and that the fact that Bill objected in-and-of-itself might be
> sufficient to argue that there was not consensus.
> The process.txt document dated Spetember 14, 2014 does not support
> Steve's claim. I have not read previous versions of that document, and
> I don't know which version of the process the TC should look at here.
Hi Sam,
thanks for your efforts in resolving this conflict.
After one year of discussion and negociation, following the "policy change
process", a consensus was found, with nobody standing up against it. A couple
of weeks later, Bill abused his commit privileges and reverted the change. I
think that this is clearly unacceptable, and I hope that the change on which
everybody worked on and agreed will be restored without further discussion.
If the TC insits on discussing, then the next question is what to discuss. And
then you will realise that Bill's objections are still not clear as of today.
Since Bill makes no effort to discuss, I think that the discussion should stop
with the rejection of his objections.
In the end, what is at a stake here is not the menu systems. The Debian menu
system is not a default anymore, and after the release we will see its
installation rate erode, and its usage to continue to fade away. Blocking the
policy change has no effect, because already a large number of package
maintainers disregard that in theory, it is a "must" to have a menu entry for
every interactive program in Debian.
So what is at a stake here, is whether the Policy reflects the current
consensual and unchallenged practice, or whether it is lagging on real facts by
a couple for years or more.
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: