On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:31:19PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > All Manoj is doing is filing bugs. Anyone can do that. I don't see any > reason why that would make anything harder in the long run. I have seen him assert in a bug on one package that I'm subscribed to that the package has been "deemed too buggy to be in Debian", and that this justifies a "serious" severity on the bug - effectively affirming that the ftp team has the right to arbitrarily overrule Policy. I think that's a problem. > We knew this decision by the ftp team was coming for a while, and will > require checking against our other documents and probably changes to the > severity of various rules. And I objected before when this was first proposed that the ftp team should not be auto-rejecting from the archive for any issues that are not violations of Policy "must" requirements. The right process is: discuss; reach a consensus; amend Policy; enforce Policy. The wrong process is: the ftp team declares that certain bugs are blockers for inclusion in the archive, and Policy is left to scramble to keep up with documenting this. The ftp team are stewards of the archive, not autocrats. > It's going to take changes to Lintian as well as Policy. I think it's a > very positive step forward for the archive as a whole to start doing > auto-rejects for some major Lintian tags, so I'm happy to help do the work > there, as much as I have time to do so. I agree with this principle. What I object to is the arbitrary and non-consensual definition of "major" that's currently being used. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature