Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> writes: > Currently I am looking at these 3: Your plan seems good to me. >> I really don't care, but I think we should have the strategies well >> documented, because this is tricky for us all. Maybe we can give up on >> recommending any particular strategy and just document all three >> distinct approaches that I'm aware of. > > I agree we should have a unified way to do this, and there should be > enough discussions to have multiple people to understand pros and cons > of different ways of doing it and landing on the agreed upon best > practice. Yes, although I'm slowly ariving at a position that this is all just arbitrary and subjective, and we already have several different styles in the archive, so nothing we will document will move the needle substantially. So when reviewing doc changes, we have to decide if our NEW documentation on this should introduce a conflict against what's in the archive, or chose some other stragegy, including: 1) Weasle word things a'la "The following single approach is what we recommend, but other strategies exists". 2) Describe several different methods, with details, possibly including a team-wide preference (if there is one). We have so many documents claiming that things must be in some particular way, and nobody is enforcing or caring about that. I'm beginning to think this is a problem with our approach to documentation rather than a problem with the things that aren't compliant. /Simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature