Re: Bug#193497: marked as done (svtools: svsetup uses bashism "echo -e")
Please do not CC me on mailing list messages; I am subscribed to the list.
On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 11:26:49AM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman <email@example.com> a tapot? :
> > Debian policy is not a code of laws; I was using 'legislate'
> > metaphorically.
> > "Good sense" in this case has to do with the quality of one's work
> > regarding a volunteer effort. If you do not believe in this idea, then
> > I doubt your hand could be forced by a document.
> If a document exist and say "well, most people here think things should be
> done that way for these reasons", it defines the "common sense".
> Until such a document exists, it's possible to argue that this "common
> sense" is not really "common".
One can argue all he wants, but it is not possible to force a volunteer to
do a good job, to take pride in his work, regardless of what is written in
> When you legislate, you often define in which way a work should be done
> for the benefit of everybody. The debian policy is somehow a code of laws,
> defining how things should done theorically. And it seems to me that
> debian people all agreed to try to conform to this code of laws once they
See the section in policy which describes its scope, and the rationale,
which I quoted earlier in this thread.
> Examples from the policy:
> 2.1.4 The non-free section
> It's a rule, isn't it? A law. If people disregard this rule, main would
> be chaos.
If that rule is not met, it technical problems with the distribution and
puts many different people at legal risk.
> 5.3 debian/changelog
> Same here.
If that rule is not met, basic tools for building packages may fail to work.
> To get things done in a coherent way, sometimes it's needed to write down
> exactly what is truly expected by most people.
Do you see the difference between these technical rules and a notion of best
practice, good sense or quality of work?