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

Re: Patch Tagging Guidelines: DEP-3 moved to ACCEPTED status


On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> just because that you didn't get any reports you should not set a status
> to ACCEPTED. IMHO the driver of a DEP should not do that at all, at
> least not without asking on common lists first. No reaction on your DEP
> could just mean that people consider it as a waste of time or don't like
> your format.

We did have lots of discussion when we were designing it. People commented
and reacted.

Remember that this format is there to help and is not mandatory (although
it's likely to be considered as a best practice in terms of packaging).

So if you find it a waste of time, ignore it.

But it's already widely used (I have used it for my own packages, Ubuntu
is recommending it too), it has been designed following an open process to
let everybody participate and ensure it fits as many scenario as possible.
It's lightweight and compatible with many of Git's convention.

And I have been asked about moving it to ACCEPTED by someone else already
(I think it was zack but I no longer remember). And the reason why I post
here is precisely so that people can object _if needed_.

So do you have a reason to object to the ACCEPTED status of this DEP
or was this pure rhetoric ?

Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Pre-order a copy of the Debian Administrator's Handbook and help
liberate it: http://debian-handbook.info/liberation/

Reply to: