Re: Policy on pkgs with same filename and QA rant (was: Re: Mercury compiler (policy, anybody)?)
On Wed, 5 Mar 1997, Chris Fearnley wrote:
> 'Christian Schwarz wrote:'
> >
> >If you want to add something to our policy manual, someone has to try to
> >formulate the idea, so we can simple discuss it. We need something more
> >"general" for our manual, as for example:
> >
> >``It is not allowed that two packages install programs with different
> >functionality but with the same filenames. (The case of two programs
> >having the same functionality but different implementations is handled via
> >`alternatives.') If this case happens, one of the programs has to be
> >renamed. The maintainers should report this to the developers' mailing
> >list where it will be dicussed. The VP of Engineering will make a final
> >decision which program has to be renamed.''
>
> Kill the last sentence replacing it with: "If consensus can not be
> reached, the two packages will have to conflict with each other."
Ok, good point. My current version is:
``It is not allowed that two packages that are not marked as conflicting
packages install programs with different functionality but with the same
filenames. (The case of two programs having the same functionality but
different implementations is handled via `alternatives.') If this case
happens, one of the programs has to be renamed. The maintainers should
report this to the developers' mailing list where it will be dicussed. If
consensus can not be reached, the two packages will have to be assigned as
`conflicting' packages.''
> I'm appalled by the word "VP" occuring anywhere in the the policy
> manual. Someone else recently said that we should make our decisions
> based on technical reasons. I concur. I'm disappointed to see so many
> compromises on quality lately (right after our long thread on QA).
> Engineering excellence requires an uncompromising approach to
> problems: complete solutions must be sought (solutions that satisfy
> all parties). And consensus is the best way to accomplish said
> excellence (I cite the Internet STD documents and Linux kernel
> development as proof). Is my fear being realized: that the existence
> of a quality control manager will decrease quality because one can
> lobby the QA manager to get a hack "approved"?
>
> We all need to be QA managers. We all need to be Distribution
> managers.
Agreed.
Thanks,
Chris
-- Christian Schwarz
schwarz@monet.m.isar.de, schwarz@debian.org,
Debian is looking schwarz@mathematik.tu-muenchen.de, bm955877@muenchen.org
for a logo! Have a
look at our drafts PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
at http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/debian-logo/
Reply to: