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

Bug#741573: #741573: Menu Policy and Consensus

On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 02:38:50PM -0700, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Maybe discussion was the wrong word. What I mean is that for more than
> one year, any vote on this bug was prevented by the TC waiting for any
> one of its members to catch up on the discussion, articulate his
> concerns, write down a counter-proposal or refine their own
> proposal. What I'm saying is that here the perfect is the enemy of the
> good. You could have held a vote with three options (conses achieved +
> override Bill, consenus not achieved + agree with Bill, further
> discussion) within days of receiving this bug, and most likely would
> have been able to resolve it. 

Maybe I would have been overruled, but given those three options I would
always have voted "further discussion".  As we discussed early on in the TC
deliberations, neither of these options makes for good policy.  A policy
document telling maintainers "there are two menu systems, pick whichever one
you want" is bad policy.  A policy document telling maintainers to continue
using a menu system that's been superseded by events in the larger Free
Software ecosystem is bad policy.

The Technical Committee is never going to be a great way to write policy
because of the process involved, but the preferred method of using
debian-policy@lists for this didn't work either in this case.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: