Re: first proposal for a new maintainer policy
'Manoj Srivastava wrote:'
> Well, I think if one is not constrained to follow policy, nor
> required to do so, I see no reason to actually follow policy. Why is
> it so bad to require policy to be followed?
How would you enforce it? Why require something which your police
force cannot enforce? I hope you don't wish to flog or flame
Since we are all conscientious people here, it seems that we would be
better off using bugs and policy as a means of _persuading_ others to
follow us. Not as something required.
I think of policy and bugs as a cultural procedure to more formally
advise developers and users on the collective wisdom of the Project.
I agree that developing impediments to bad packages is important. But
I don't see any value in trying to enforce those impediments.
Whenever I get called to jury duty, I tell the judge "why of course, I
will take your pronouncements and the entire history of law under
advisement in rendering my decision". For some odd reason they usually
dismiss me at this point. I guess the judicial system is not as
open-minded as I am :)
Christopher J. Fearnley | Linux/Internet Consulting
firstname.lastname@example.org | Design Science Revolutionary
http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf | Explorer in Universe
ftp://ftp.netaxs.com/people/cjf | "Dare to be Naïve" -- Bucky Fuller
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org