Re: [PROPOSED] Merging the packaging manual and policy packages
Hi,
>>"Robert" == Robert Woodcock <rcw@debian.org> writes:
Robert> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> If we agree that the packaging manual has the weight of Policy,
We already have been thorugh this, this was a matter of
form. The only forum that can decide what constitutes Debian policy
is the Technical committee, and the policy mailing list. The policy
mailing list came to the conclusion in september that the Packaging
manual was part of core policy, and the developers reference was
not.
Robert> Currently it does not.
Says who? This mailing list agreed that the packagingn manual
has the weight of policy, and that was announced on debian-devel as
well, and accepted by a vote in this forum. I am willing to quote
Chapter and verse:
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00072.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00074.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00076.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00077.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00083.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00084.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00086.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00088.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00089.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00090.html
Robert> Someone needs to go over it with a fine-toothed comb to pick
Robert> out non-policy issues, and transfer them to a third document,
Robert> perhaps entitled "Packaging Hints" or something. Better yet,
Robert> rename the whole document and then feed information gradually
Robert> from policy and it to the new Packaging Manual.
Since it has already been given the weight of policy, this is
irrelevant. If there are things in Debian policy you think do not
belong here, please float a proposal.
Robert> However, pretending the Packaging Manual is policy is a bad
Robert> idea. It was a reference guide previously.
Rubbish. It was accepted as Policy way back by this list, and
it has had the weigt of policy since September at least. As far as I
remember, the packaging manual was the technical rulebook which had
to be followed.
Robert> Tread carefully here - you entered into this conversation by
Robert> rewriting history and are now severely underestimating the
Robert> consequences of your actions.
You are the one trying to rewrite history now. Talk about
treading carefully. Please reviev the articles I have pointed out
before you enter into this debate again.
Robert> If you wish to turn the Policy manual into the Debian
Robert> political policy and the Packaging manual into the Debian
Robert> technical policy, know that I am in favor of such a
Robert> thing. But don't pretend that there are no content changes to
Robert> be made.
Since you are talking about things which are already policy, I
would ask you to find out internal inconsistencies in the policy
documents and propose changes. But I shall resist strongly any
attempts to go backwards and throw out documents that are part of
Debian policy, and reintegrate the contents.
manoj
--
Dinner is ready when the smoke alarm goes off.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: