Le dimanche, 30 août 2015, 13.01:36 Nikolaus Rath a écrit : > On Aug 30 2015, Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote: > > Nikolaus> Surely there is no need to single out the traditional > > Nikolaus> menu as something that must not be used. It's > > Nikolaus> sufficient if policy mandates the use of .desktop > > Nikolaus> files, anything beyond that ought to be entirely up to > > Nikolaus> the maintainer. > > > > I think the argument in favor of this need is that we're trying to > > force a transition of the traditional menu to .desktop as a > > metadata format. > > Indeed. The question is why. > > A. This comes very close to design work which the CTTE should not be > doing. If there's a conflict between two crappy designs and the > CTTE is asked to rule, then you should pick the less crappy one or > decline to rule, not create an entirely new design. I agree that the option D comes very close, and I would have strongly objected to voting an full-blown patch to debian-policy (which would really be "detailed design work"). But as currently phrased, I find the ballot well aligned with §6.1.1: deciding on any matter of technical policy. I don't think the TC would work better (or even "well" in absolute terms) if it constrained itself to only picking from option sets it gets presented. Sometimes, taking responsibility for the actual technical policy and for setting good policy is what the TC is charged with by the constitution. Cheers, OdyX
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.