Re: Thwarting Policy via BTS
Quite correct, my choice of words was misleading. I should have said
"conventions" instead of "rules".
-- John
Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:
> > In fact, as I pointed out before, the rules explicitly prohibit what
> > you have done.
>
> John, while I feel your pain (24 minutes?!), I have to point out that the
> developer's reference is not formal debian policy[1], and no formal debian
> policy document talks about NMU's. This is because policy documents say what
> must be in packages and how they must behave, but it is out of their scope
> to control how developers behave.
>
> I only want to make this point so people don't start getting the impression
> that the developer's reference is policy, or that policy controls what
> people may and may not do. I'm not trying to condone Thomas's action.
>
> --
> see shy jo
>
> [1] "Furthermore, this document is _not an expression of formal policy_. It
> contains documentation for the Debian system, and generally agreed-upon
> best practices."
>
--
John Goerzen Linux, Unix consulting & programming jgoerzen@complete.org |
Developer, Debian GNU/Linux (Free powerful OS upgrade) www.debian.org |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The 958,410th digit of pi is 9.
Reply to: