On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 10:54:54AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > I agree that we shouldn't require it for potato. I agree that non-compliance > with this policy probably won't be release critical. On the other hand, > I find it hard to imagine any circumstance that would prevent fixing > the small set of packages which would be affected by this policy by > potato+1. I'm not so sure it's such a small set of packages, but I'm agreeable to that if we can do it. > > My second condition is that this is done as part of the ftp archive revamp > > rather than before or after. If Guy is going to implement pools for > > potato+1 it doesn't make sense to make a bunch of changes that include > > significant modifications to dselect twice. ie, if packages are going to > > start using Enhances, they should start using Keywords at the same time. > > This (hopefully) prevents duplicated work and wasted bandwidth. > > I think what you're saying here is: the policy which supports Enhances: > should be the same as the policy which supports Keywords: > > ? Yes. > [Because it would be silly, in this case, to postpone package updates > till after some proposed ftp site administration gets done.] The ftp site stuff being done would be nice to adress cleanly other issues such as the question of what is and isn't part of Debian. (And give us package pools) > Sure, but this concern applies to most policy updates, not just the two > you mentioned. More generally, we need some kind of release management > for debian-policy and that should somehow interelate to general debian > release management. > > This a rather larger topic, in general, but hopefully we can just rely > on the policy editors for now. This is exactly why I want to hash out sane implementation now. -- - Joseph Carter GnuPG public key: 1024D/DCF9DAB3, 2048g/3F9C2A43 - knghtbrd@debian.org 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <Kensey> RMS for President??? <RelDrgn> ...or ESR, he wants a new job ;)
Attachment:
pgpyz11nc1YpG.pgp
Description: PGP signature