Re: Conflicts between developers and policy
Hi,
I think we are getting nowhere fast.
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> writes:
Dale> On 1 May 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Dale, I think no one is trying to be dictatorial about policy.
Dale> When you say the policy MUST be followed to the letter, I can
Dale> view that as nothing less than a dictatorial attitude.
Both Phillip and Budha have proposed riders to that bare
statement. I think you are just trying to be confrontational here.
Dale> I am a maintainer who chooses not to spend my time in the policy
Dale> group, but prefers to spend what little time I have working on
Dale> my package responsibilities. One of the things that has bothered
Dale> me about your position on this matter, is that you seem to think
Dale> that maintainers who don't get involved in the policy discussion
Dale> are shurking their duties, while I don't.
You do not have to be subscribed t policy to amend it. Just
send mail to the policy group, and ask you be CC'ed to replies. We
are genrally nce people who CC with a passion.
BTW, I do think maintainers who ignore policy for their own
packages but can't send a email message explaining the reason to the
policy list *are* shurking their duties. There are times when real
world matters intrude, and people have to temporarily withdraw from
the project (I left for a few months in the fall of '96, and took
back kernek-package when I felt I had time to fulfull my duties as a
maintainer).
>> Not everyone has the grasp of the subject as the person pointing
>> out the error of policy, so amending policy is really just being
>> co-operative.
>>
Dale> I thought that was what the policy group was there for. I have
Dale> alwasy assumed that this kind of work was their responsibility.
The policy list is mere mortals too. If you find a flaw in the
policy (a flaw is having to ignore policy for your package
since ``obviously'' your package is an exception, or a flaw in
policy is when following policy shall break packages) you send a
email to the policy list. If you are too busy to send email, I submit
you are too busy to be a maintainer at the moment, and you should
seek co-maintainers to lighten your load.
Dale> As a developer, I use the policy statements to help me decide on
Dale> particular issues of packaging. How is it that I am now the
Dale> responsible party for fixing a policy that I don't see as
Dale> broken?
If you find that following policy shall break packages, I
think you are indeed responsible for pointing this out. (See? I
thought such co-operation was obvious, too).
Dale> So, why am I responsible for your ignorance?
Cause, O fount of wisdom, us unworthy developers beseech
thee. If you find something that others are ognorant of, especially
if you have to flout policy in your packages in order not to break
your package, please, please, let the rest of us know. Not all of us
are as able as you are.
Dale> My only problem is when you make it my responsibility to
Dale> "correct" the policy statement.
You found the flaw. No one else seems to have. If you do not
correct it, who will? (Frankly, I am dissapointed by this argument).
>> I think then it is definitely unclear, and an ambiguous policy
>> statement is a broken policy statement.
>>
Dale> Then fix it, if you think it is broken, and stop chastizing me
But you are the one who knows what is broken and what is the
right thing to do, since you have done The Right Thing for your
packages.
Dale> because we currently live with a less than perfect Policy
Dale> Statement. From my point of view, I follow policy when I deliver
Dale> a working unstripped binary instead of a broken stripped one.
No, you ignore a broekn policy directive to strip a
binary. And despite knowing policy is flawed, you do not wish to
share your expertise and allow others to benefit from your
wisdom. What are you gunning for, a promotion?
manoj
--
The lion and the calf shall lie down together, but the calf won't get
much sleep. -- Woody Allen
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: