Re: nouser/nogroup clarification
Hi,
>>"Philip" == Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> writes:
Philip> I certainly don't want to be held responsible for policy, so
Philip> am only interested in being the person that says ``If this is
Philip> the consensus, I'll type it up for final approval'', just to
Philip> avoid the current situation where things get agreed, but
Philip> nothing gets into the manual.
I just think we need a mechanism that demonstrates that there
indeed is a consensus in this group, like a post like you made,
asking for objections to be voiced, and setting a reasonable time
limit for them to be registered. I think Christian used to have at
least a 2 week period.
Philip> (yeah, right. I'm doing this for the power trip ;-)
I don't think Christian was either. However, such opinions
_were_ voiced. I would rather not loose more developers to something
like the ugliness that resulted efore Christian left.
>> Formerly, we did have a process by which policy was amended,
>> and even that was deemed insufficient since there were no consensus
>> determinnation processes in place. I would like to see something
>> instituted before we mosify the policy.
Philip> This is just going to put an unnecessary block on changes
Philip> where there is no argument. For contentious issues, I agree
Philip> it would be nice to have a mechanism for deciding, but in the
Philip> mean time we might as well get on with the trivial changes to
Philip> which nobody objects.
I think that the block is a major motivation to get our act
together and formulate a policy amendment policy. I have been toying
with something like that, but have not had the time to polish it up
to draft status.
Lacking a formal process, I would still like to reasonable
sure that the change indeed is something to which there is no serious
objection; and that requires, I think, possibly an announcement on
Debian devel (stating the change, and requesting any objections to be
posted to the debian-policy list); and a two week waiting period for
objections to be presented.
The Policy is something quite critical to Debian; and I don't
think this delibration in amending it is out of line.
manoj
--
When you don't have an education, you've got to use your
brains. Anonymous
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: