Re: /usr/doc transition and other things
Hi,
>>"Raul" == Raul Miller <moth@magenta.com> writes:
Raul> Technical policy is supposed to be ratified by the technical committee.
Raul> [The committee hadn't been doing its job, but that doesn't free any of
Raul> us from the responsibility for failures in technical policy.]
If that means that the only technical policy acceoted is one
that has to be ratified by the tech ctte, and no other body of
developers can formulate such policy, I am uncomfortable with that.
This is a volunteer project, and the policy is merely one part
of the rules that we, the developers, have all agreed to adhere to in
order to keep chaos at bay.
I am personally not very comfortable with the idea of
delegating som much power to a group of people that were apponted by
one DPL, and are not really accountable to anyone. Yes, I know the
developers can over rule them, but that is not something to be used
frivoulously. What are the checks and balances that apply here?
Add to that the fact that the tech ctte seems to feel that the
only thing the tech ctte should do is choose between multiple
proposals. That would mean that people come up with a consensus on a
technical issue, and there is a proposal, we are stymied; since the
tech ctte also seemed to feel at one point that they are only there
to resolve a conflict. Or has this all changed now?
manoj
--
There is not in nature a thing that makes a man so deform'd, so
beastly, as doth intemperate anger. -- Webster's Duchess of Malp.
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: