[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Policy process (was: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?)

On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> writes:
> > I don't think policy changes need to be seconded.  We have a policy team
> > that should decide on what comes in policy and what not.  Although, it
> > more looks like it's just 1 person doing all the work.
> > I sometimes feel that they go to slow which changing things, and I'm not
> > really sure it's a good or bad thing.
> > Some of those currently open bugs against the policy package, like your
> > ~ in version numbers, really shouldn't be a problem to get into the
> > policy.  I don't think anybody has a problem with it.  I think it's just
> > that no new version of the policy has been made yet.
> Well, policy-process is still shipped with the debian-policy package, and
> my experience in the past is that when I follow that process, the changes
> go into Policy fairly quickly.  Certainly seconding would show that
> someone reviewed the wording of my proposed ~ patch and has confirmed that
> it sounds like an accurate and implementable description of their
> behavior.

As a debian-policy denizen, I am quick to second proposal I like.
However, here this a purely the description of what dpkg do.
What matter is whether the text is faithful to the implementation,
not whether I like it or not, and i don't feel qualified to vet the

However, there is at least 2 dpkg maintainers, they are very qualified
to check it, and I expected they would second the proposal.

If they did not see it, I suggest to forward it to them asking for
review and second.

Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 

Reply to: