What is Policy? (was: Policy as rule of law, or whatever)
This is an issue I have seen discussed in many different settings... in
business, organizations, or anything else that needs policies or laws. The
basic question that needs to be kept in mind and answered is: What is a
policy, and what is it intended to do?
What it's intended to do is the easier answer. It is meant to steer
people towards a common goal, define organizational structures, be a
reference guide to project members, and provide valuable information to
newcomers on How Things Are Done.
The harder of these two questions is: What is a policy? Well, when
looking at its intent, it almost seems obvious, but on looking closer it
really is not. Along with intent another issue that has to be addressed is
how it is enforced. This is the real question: is the policy a set in stone
law? is it simply a set of suggestions? The real answer is that is needs
to be something in between.
A policy is a set of guidelines that should be followed. In the policy it
should either be understood or implicitly stated that exceptions can be
made, and the circumstances or procedure for making exceptions outlined. A
policy should be an evolving document, always adapting to changes in the Way
Things Are Done and reflecting the goals of the organization/project it
relates to.
Last (but most certainly not least!!) is the issue of common sense. If
something is stated in a policy that does not agree with what is being done,
one of three things can happen: Change the policy, change what's being
done, or have an exception. No policy ever is bullet proof, and common
sense is the easiest way through most problems.
Enough said. I've seen too many policy battles result in stalemates and
bruised egos, and plain old common sense and understanding could have
averted most of them. We have a great project here, being worked on by lots
of smart people putting in their time for free, and the easier the working
environment is, the better the results of the work usually are.
Nils.
In message <[🔎] 19980521001306.A3631@yodeller.rising.com.au>, Hamish Moffatt
writes
:
>On Tue, May 19, 1998 at 01:11:31PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> I think my main problem with the `pro-strong-policy' arguments that
>> I've been seeing here is that they seem to imply an assumption that
>> policy is by definition correct, and that any point where it wasn't
>> the relevant policy document maintainer would agree at once.
>
>This seems reasonable. If adopted, can we define policy to be binding
>rather than just recommendations/guidelines? I have real trouble
>with the idea of a policy which is non-binding (for Debian at least).
>
>
>Hamish
>--
>Hamish Moffatt, hamish@debian.org, hamish@rising.com.au, hmoffatt@mail.com
>Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5
>CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
>
>
>--
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: