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

Re: Draft new DFSG

On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 06:31:22PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:

> Complete agreement here, I dislike the consitution, the new policy
> maintainence system, developers not being able to close bugs in other's
> packages, and all the recent buerarcracy of the past 6 months.

What?  We can't close each other's bugs?  When did that start?

Mind you, I can't think of many good reasons to close someone else's bug,
but I can't think of a good reason to stop us, either.

> > We don't need a policy that says "Programs that mail some random user
> > your /etc/shadow file will not be allowed in the distribution."
> I was of course not arguing for such an addition to policy.

Of course not.  I was ranting, and I'm sorry if I misrepresented you
at the time.

> (I notice you didn't bother to comment on the huge useless package that
> could kill debian point.)

I couldn't think of anything more to add.  Regardless of policy, it's pretty
obvious that no 5 gig packages will be allowed into Debian, simply because
there's not enough space in Incoming :)

There will be borderline cases here, though.  How about a 20 meg package
containing educational 3-D renderings of the life cycle of a squid?  Pretty
useless to me, but then again so's xemacs and it's just as big :)

On that note, Debian is growing at such a huge rate that we'll have to start
refusing things sooner or later.  But rather than take them out
completely, we just need a good way to divide things up between CD's.  So
the all-important stuff goes on CD #1, less important on CD #2, and so on. 
Vendors would have the option of selling any number of the CD's that they

And how do we decide which packages are "important" enough for the first CD? 
Why, the popularity-contest of course!  (plug plug)

Well, there are some obvious holes in that idea, but I'll leave it to
someone else to shoot me down.

Have fun,


Reply to: