On the disposition of old policy proposals
Hi,
http://www.debian.org/Bugs/db/pa/ldebian-policy.html
One of the goals of the policy update mechanisms was to
eliminate, or at least ameliorate, the tendency for discussions to
get bogged down indefinitely on the mailing lists (we do thast quite
often ;-)
Since Julian was gracious enough to trudge through the lot of
bug reports against the package, we have now identified a whole bunch
of old proposals that have stalled out and lingered in the BTS.
If there is any merit in these proposals, they should be
revived, by getting seconds and moving into the amendment phase (with
its own builtin time limit of discussion), or they should be swept
out of the BTS.
I suggest that a 4 week period be given to these old
proposals, and if they have not changed status by the 4rth of July, I
shall close those reports and remove the clutter on the BTS.
In other policy related news, people would have noticed that
there have been a number of amendments to the policy that have been
accepted. I am working on editing the policy manual to incorporate
them atther moment. I am also merging in the source package for the
packlaging manual into the policy manual, since most of the packaging
is identical between the packages, and it is maintained by the same
people. This makes no normative change in the status of either
document.
Due to the number of amendments, and the formal adoption of
the FHS, this new policy document shall be version 3.0.0.
manoj
ps. Since this is being cross-posted to debian-devel, the following
table is to explain the convention for the BTS used by the policy
group
The stages in a proposals life
a) Pre discussion period, an idea is
floated, and kicked around and wishlist bug, titled [PROPOSAL]
polished for a bit. No preset
time limit, but at some point,
if it is stalled, the bug should
be closed.
b) Formally seconded, and a time
table set for discussion (normally normal bug, titled [AMENDMENT yy/mm/dd]
10 days to a month)
c) End of discussion period.
i) Consensus: forwarded, titled [ACCEPTED yy/mm/dd]
ii) Stalled closed, titled [REJECTED]
d) edited into the policy doc closed
--
I needed the good will of the legislature of four states. I formed
the legislative bodies with my own money. I found that it was
cheaper that way. Jay Gould
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: