Re: RFC: a more sensible structure for policy
>>"Jay" == James A Treacy <treacy@debian.org> writes:
Jay> Each section of policy should be written as a set of bullet points
Jay> divided by importance: _must_, _should_ and _may_. This may be
Jay> followed by a some text giving the rationale for a given rule (or
Jay> set of rules).
Jay> The bullet points should be short and only concern a single idea -
Jay> explanatory material can go in the rationale section.
Jay> The bullet points could be numbered. My only concern with that
Jay> is potential confusion if people are looking at different versions.
As far as possible, the rationaly should be included in a
informative note to prevent rehashing of the arguments over and over
again.
Jay> For example:
Jay> 0.999 How Policy is written
Jay> Every policy
Jay> A. must:
Jay> - be short
Jay> - consise
{Rationale: long => hard to read, less effective}
Jay> B. should:
Jay> - make sense
{Rationale: less controvercy, less surprise}
Jay> C. may:
Jay> - be entertaining (highly unlikely, but let's keep the possibility
Jay> there)
manoj
--
QOTD: "I used to be lost in the shuffle, now I just shuffle along
with the lost."
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: