Re: policy summary (new packages without man pages)
Hello,
On Fri, Jan 14, 2000 at 11:32:33AM +0000, Owen Dunn wrote:
>[..]
>
> In the case in point, I think it's more important (in terms of benefit
> to Debian and Debian users) that we have a package at all than that we
> have the `perfect' package;
I'm afraid I don't quite agree with you. You seem to assume that a package
is good by itself (a package for a package). I think that a package is
good by :
- what is *in* the package ;
- the way this package cooperates with the rest of the distribution.
I have precisely one example in mind of a package that is (see the debian-qa
mailing list archives for more details) :
- almost useless ;
- introducing potential security holes.
The only justification of this package seems to be the desir of the packager
to get a my_name@debian.org.
By the way, this example is an orphaned package. This means that the problem
is not to put a drastic wall in front of the new candidates ( as a french
politician has said : "Promises are only commitments for who believes them !")
but a *permanent* verification of the work that is made (or not...). The
first sort of the candidates can be made by the stage in debian-qa area (and
please note that *I* am not a developer, but that I shall be a candidate).
Debian needs muscles, not fat... neither new nor old !
Best regs,
--
Thierry LARONDE
thierry.laronde@polynum.com
website : http://www.polynum.com
Reply to: