Re: Debian doesn't have to be slower than time.
>>"Will" == Will Lowe <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> If emacs policy, say, were to be significatly changed in some ways, a
>> lot of packages would be implicated. You seem to be saying we should
>> just never make those changes.
Will> Certainly those changes need to be made, sometimes. But it seems like
Will> as a Project we could do a better job of not making major changes in
Will> Emacs policy, Perl policy, Debian policy, Menu policy, and every other
Will> policy all at the same time during the same release.
Will> Maybe for 3.1 if we discover we need a major Emacs Policy change that
Will> means we *shouldn't* have a major Perl policy change until 3.2
Will> ... that way we keep the number of broken-by-policy packages down to a
Will> reasonable number PER RELEASE.
Policy is not allowed to change such that there are a
significant number of broken packages, so this is a unnecessary
"... all the good computer designs are bootlegged; the formally
planned products, if they are built at all, are dogs!" David
E. Lundstrom, "A Few Good Men From Univac", MIT Press, 1987
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C