Re: Package documentation
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 11:34:09PM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > That would be a reason *not* to put it in policy, at least until we
> > consider the reasons for such a refusal. Policy is supposed to
> > encode the things we do agree on.
>
> That's not true, and it never was. Policy changes often leaves existing
> packages in non-compliance. And that's good.
It's only good if there's consensus that those packages should be changed.
It doesn't have to be unanimous, but all viewpoints should be heard and
considered.
> As I see it policy is there to give somebody the right of filing a bug
> report.
I strongly disagree with that view. I'm not on this list to help make
a sharper stick.
Richard Braakman
Reply to: