Re: [PROPOSED] Merging the packaging manual and policy packages
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Robert> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> If we agree that the packaging manual has the weight of Policy,
> 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:
[...]
Ok, reading through those a few times, I see that Manoj said in
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-policy-9809/msg00072.html:
"I hope I am not incorrect in assuming that the debian-policy,
packaging-manual, and the developers-reference packages constitute
the core of the policy documents."
According to him this is a proposal. Note that it is unseconded, noone
ever voted for it, and noone ever objected to it. It also requires the
reader to equate "core of the policy documents" with "carrying the weight
of policy".
In light of this, I am inclined to agree with Manoj that the packaging
manual is policy, although I ask Manoj to use a question next time he
wants a group of people to state whether they agree or disagree with
something.
> 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.
Anything where you wouldn't file a bug against a non-compliant package
should be dropped or moved to another document. I don't have anything
in particular in mind right now.
> 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.
This slight of hand has created quite a bit of confusion among developers,
especially me. :) Until bug #31645 has been marked as 'done' neither the
Policy document nor the Packaging Manual will recognize the Packaging
Manual as policy. I never saw a public announcement that a concensus was
reached either - surely an addition of 3115 lines of text to policy would
have warranted some notice on -devel-announce or at least -devel. Indeed,
in your announcements to -devel-announce regarding policy on Oct 30 and
Nov 27, you never gave it a mention.
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-devel-announce-9810/msg00012.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-devel-announce-9811/msg00031.html
I can't find anything in a quick search of -devel about any concensus
either.
Please don't do this again.
> 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.
Ok, I apologize. You were not rewriting history, you were just writing it
without any input. :)
Bottom line, I no longer have any objections about people claiming the
Packaging Manual to be part of Policy.
> Dinner is ready when the smoke alarm goes off.
Hahaha - I like that one :)
--
Robert Woodcock - rcw@debian.org
"Unix and C are the ultimate computer viruses" -- Richard Gabriel
Reply to: