On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 08:40:13AM -0600, Julian Gilbey wrote: > I'd like to rewrite policy soonish. Into what, exactly? Last time this came up we had a nice flamewar about it, but didn't seem to resolve anything -- does it really make sense to do a rewrite while we as a project don't seem to have a clear idea of what policy's meant to be? Talking to Manoj the other day, I think it finally made sense to me what he was getting at, which leads me to think what we might be aiming at is to split policy into three separate docs: -- Release Critical Issues (a straight out list of problems that get a package pulled from testing, maintained by the RM) -- Debian Best Packaging Practices (guidelines on how to do packaging well, generally) -- The Debian Specifications Document (fairly formal specs on things like the version number format, format of .debs, layout of source packages, control file fields probably, update-rc.d spec, menu file format, and so on) Violations of the latter document can probably be checked completely automatically, and in many cases won't even make it into the archive. Many of the BPP guidelines will be able to be checked by lintian/linda too hopefully, at best only a few of them are worth RC bugs, though. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Attachment:
pgpt4xEu9OcDJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature