Re: Policy about policy
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 06, 1999 at 01:36:02AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> It looks like one of the most problematic aspects of my way of thinking
> is the idea that the opinions of developers should be solicited when
> policy would impact their packages.
This is at least impractical. Noone will have the time to investigate 3000
packages to see if a policy proposal will affect these packages and contact
their developers. Also, many developers will not care either way. As a
volunteer project, we have to make sure that any solution we come up with
does not create too much burden for our maintainers. On the other hand, the
same is true for any proposal to how the policy groups should work: If it is
too much work to make a proposal and get it implemented, we will not get any
proposals and will not make progress.
Everyone who cares about policy should at least read Joey Hess' weekly summary
and if there are points he is interested in (for example because they affect
his package), he can read up the relevant thread in the bug logs and give
his input. Is more really needed? I don't think so.
> Now, I agree that this should be a "best effort" sort of thing -- it's
> silly to wait around for a developer who hasn't been heard of for quite
> some time.
I don't think the policy group should be required to contact individual
developers. Instead, individual developers are always encouraged to join the
policy group. There is a mailing list, an archive, the bug tracking system
and a weekly summary. I don't think more is needed.
> > I don't see the need for changing the procedure. Especially I don't
> > think we should hide behind procedures, formalization and voting.
>
> In the above paragraph, I don't think that you said what you intended
> to say. [For example: filing a bug report is an example of following
> a procedure. Policy is a formalization. And voting.. well.. I agree
> that pure consensus is more optimum than voting.]
Perhaps I should have added: "I don't think we should hide ... more than
necessary". Perhaps I meant something different. The point is that creating
yet another procedure or formalization will not solve the problems we
experience. I expect the policy group to be more careful with big proposals
and objections now (we have learned our lesson), and this is what really
helps.
> So, anyways, while I appreciate your comments, I hope you understand
> that I'm feeling my way around here -- I'm not ready to propose anything,
> and won't be for quite a while.
>
> Mostly, I don't want to operate in the dark: proposing random
> constitutional ammendments isn't going to make me feel any easier.
If this is the other main point of you we should ask the DPL for approval of
our work.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org for public PGP Key
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/
Reply to: