[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#97755: PROPOSAL] eliminating task packages; new task system

On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 09:15:10PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Am I wrong in thinking it's policy's job to document the technical
> requirements for Debian packages? Am I wrong in thinking the policy
> editors ought to be doing whatever they can to get a consensus formed
> about proposals like 51411, 53582, 53849, 54524, 62996, 69311, 80343,
> and 89473, and making sure essentially accepted proposals like 76868 and
> 54002 get implemented, or get brought up again for propoer approval if
> discussion can't even take place without an implementation?
> If so, am I also wrong in thinking that someone ought to be doing all
> those things and that, if policy indeed isn't going to do it, we'd better
> write another document and find some people that *will* do it?
> Am I wrong in thinking that having a single, well known document that
> describes what packages should look like right now is one of the key
> Cool Things about Debian?

If you have the time to sit down and do the jobs you've just listed,
fantastic, please do it and I'll step down from my policy-editing
responsibilities today.  If you don't, but you can find someone who
can, that's also fantastic.  Either way, please shut up about it.

I have said several times on this list what I am working on vis-a-vis
policy.  I don't have unlimited time available to do this and I am
doing what I can.  I have publically asked for help, and received a
small amount of help in the areas I requested from precisely two
people (you being one of them, although apparently not in direct
response to my request).

I agree with all of the above thoughts, but more volunteers are needed
to help them get done quickly.



         Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
       Debian GNU/Linux Developer,  see http://people.debian.org/~jdg
  Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/

Reply to: