Re: policy summary for past two weeks
Hi,
>>"Joseph" == Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> writes:
>> 2) People used the `formal objection' mechanism to stop the answer just
>> because the didn't like. I don't think this was right. And the people who
>> did it are starting to realize that too.. =)
Joseph> too-many-chiefs syndrome, I think the policy mechanism has
Joseph> shown itself to be open to blatant abuse.
Abuse? The mechanism was designed for implementing
non-controversial topics of technical policy. The fact it does not
work for controversial topics is not surprising, and I would hardly
call it ``shown itself to be open to blatant abuse''.
>> 3) If this `formal obection' mechanism worked this way here, then it's badly
>> designed. People can use it for normal votes... so if 40 people
>> likes a proposal and 5 don't the proposal get dumped.
Joseph> Agreed.
That depends. For a purely technical issu, if a hundred people
like a flawed proposal, and one person finds a serious technical
flaw, then the proposal needs to be seriously modified, or dumped.
Popularity is not necesarily a metric of technical
correctness, or even merit.
manoj
--
Do I have a lifestyle yet?
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: