Re: rmail, m-t-a, and uucp

[Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 03:10:18 -0500, Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> said: 

> On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 02:43:26PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Branden Robinson wrote:
>> > It has been said that the Policy Manual is supposed to document
>> > existing practice...

	Wrong.  It has been taken so out of context, and has so much
 elided, as to be provocatively deceptive; at least the provocation is
 par for the course.


	Policy does not document all existing practice.  It only
 incorporates a minimal ruleset that is required for systems
 integration (usually selecting one branch from several equally viable
 technical options). It is not a best practices document.

	Policy also should almost never (unless directed by the
 tech-ctte, and perhaps the DPL) cause a change that would make a
 significant chunk of packages instantly buggy; for such changes, we
 implement a gradual transition plan, allowing for partial upgrades
 (and perhaps using release goals as motivators). Part of the
 rationale for this is common sense; a global change, in the past, has
 taken time, and having either a large number of RC bugs, or ignoring
 a large number of bugs that would otherwise be RC seems silly; and,
 anyway, there are concerns that the policy group does not really have
 the power to change policy drastically. This is the basis of the
 policy shall not be used as a stick to beat developers with.

	Nor does it _always_ document only existing practices.  What
 that misquoted statement was a part of was a larger thesis that is
 meant to suggest that policy is not the place for testing out design;
 if a complicated technical proposal is to be made into policy, it
 should be independently implemented, have all the kinks worked out,
 and then have that working model be implemented as policy.  Having to
 change policy back and forth while a design is being worked out needs
 be avoided.

>> Then why does it talk about Enhances?

	Because a) the practice exists, b) any package can use Exists
 without breaking anything, and convey information to the user, and c)
 it emphasizes what I said above.

> Good question.

	It merely goes to show either a profound ignorance of what
 policy has been about for the last few years, or, a deliberate
 attempt to goad me.

	manoj
-- 
One nuclear bomb can ruin your whole day.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <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