Re: On Policy Compliance (was Re: static user IDs)
On Sep 19, Raul Miller wrote:
> > On Sep 18, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > > It's a problem if there's no transition to speak of. We apparently have
> > > decided not to make policy that makes a bunch of packages instantly non-
> > > compliant without a reasonable transition.
>
> On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 11:24:13PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> > I think we're starting to bastardize the concept of "policy
> > compliance" here.
>
> No. This is simple release management.
>
> You don't go from proposal to final release without some kind of
> intermediate period which involves testing. And, as Policy defines
> interfaces -- interfaces being one of the most sacred aspects of a
> computer system -- it's very reasonable to be thorough when changing it.
>
> You simply have to give policy a chance in the real world -- where
> people can implement it and see some of the unanticipated implications --
> before it's at all reasonable to make that policy mandantory.
>
> Depreciating existing practice bastardizing the concept of policy
> compliance because it's not abrupt enough? What problems would *that*
> approach solve? [Aside from gratifying some wierd sort of concept of
> absolute authority.]
My point is simply that changing policy does not translate into making
things happen by fiat. Perhaps you missed the entire point of my
mail, because it seems like we agree with each other. The entire
reason we have a minimum acceptable policy is to permit policy changes
that are transitional in nature. Moving to /var/mail does not make
any package no longer comply with policy [per se], it simply adds
another requirement for compliance with the current policy manual.
To put it another way, "current policy" by definition includes all
currently-acceptable versions of policy.
Chris
--
=============================================================================
| Chris Lawrence | Get the skinny at DeltaPolitics |
| <quango@watervalley.net> | http://deltapolitics.dhs.org/ |
| | |
| Grad Student, Pol. Sci. | Join the party that opposed the CDA |
| University of Mississippi | http://www.lp.org/ |
=============================================================================
Reply to: