Re: Building packages with exact binary matches
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 03:30:48 -0400, Clint Adams <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:34:35PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
>> You seem to be suggesting that policy should require this *before* it
>> becomes common practice. That's not generally how policy is crafted:
>> Debian policy generally does not prescribe packaging practice, but
>> rather describes it.
> Calling it "policy" is misleading then.
I don't think that follows. It is not as if packages do not
have to follow policy once it is written -- either it is a bug in the
package, or it is a bug in the policy. What we are talking about is how
changes get into policy.
In a project that is loosely coupled, geographically
distributed, and has an extremely flat org chart, policy changes
necessarily have to be conservative; and our preference is changing
Debian by persuasion and near consensus, not by edicts from above
(since there is so very little "above").
This is not to say that policy will _never_ lead the change --
but that is a very exceptional case, and probably would need to be
ratified by, say, the tech ctte.
"I got everybody to pay up front...then I blew up their planet." "Now
why didn't I think of that?"-- Post Bros. Comics
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C