ADMINISTRIVIA: Comments on old bug reports
Hi,
I swept through old bug reports, and here is my take on the
status of old reports. Please note that several proposals are now
looking for seconds.
I have also taken the liberty of setting the severity of the
proposed changes to be more in line with the policy-process document;
this makes it easier for policy editors to spot proposals that are in
a state to be acted on.
Comments welcome.
manoj
======================================================================
* #32263: [PENDING AMENDMENT 20/01/2000] Splitting cgi-bin
Package: debian-policy; Reported by: Brian White <bcwhite@pobox.com>;
4 years and 194 days old.
There has been recent progress on this. We are now merely waiting on
the basic infrastructure for this change to be implemented by the web
servers (we have to wait, since if we don't, then packages complying
with the new policy would suddenly have failing cgi-bin scripts)
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #35762: lintian could check for hardcoded --infodir in maintaner
scripts
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Santiago Vila
<sanvila@unex.es>; 4 years and 118 days old.
Hmm. Apparently, we were waiting for an transition to the FHS, and
/usr/share/info/. On may machines, I see that /usr/info is a symbolic
link to share/info; so this transition is now complete.
However, I did not see any reference to the evils of the
--infodir option; and I have forgotten what the discussion on
debian-policy may have been. Can anyone step up and say what the
upside of accepting this proposal is supposed to be?
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #47438: [PROPOSAL] update policy copyright
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Lars
Wirzenius <liw@iki.fi>; 3 years and 35 days old.
Well, since the list of contributors to this document is long, and
undocumented, whose names _do_ go on the copyright list?
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #60979: What /etc/init.d/xxx restart does?
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Radim Kolar
<hsn@cybermail.net>; merged with #87994; 2 years and 238 days old.
Isn't this now being standardized by LSB?
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #62996: no way to detect webservers without CGI support
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Rev Simon
Rumble <simon@rumble.net>; 2 years and 205 days old.
This is not a policy issue yet, this is a design and implementation
issue. Please try to get the httpd package maintainers together and
work out a solution; and then we can put the working solution into
policy.
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #65577: [Amended] copyright should include notice if a package is not
a part of Debian distribution
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Taketoshi
Sano <sano@debian.org>; 2 years and 156 days old.
Hmm. I don't know. Does it seem like we have consensus?
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #65764: changelog shouldn't be in the copyright file
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Josip Rodin
<joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>; 2 years and 153 days old.
Hmm. Sounds like we have a winner here. How about a diff, then, folks?
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #69864: debian-policy: Update section 6.7 for "examples packages"
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Adam C Powell
IV <hazelsct@mit.edu>; 2 years and 84 days old.
This too sounds reasonable to me, but there was no discussion at all.
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #172436: debian-policy: [PROPOSAL] web browser url viewing
Package: debian-policy; Reported by: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>;
days old.236
This proposal was initially seconded, but then discussion
turned up some problems, and a modified proposal was put forth. The
last message in the BTS asked for a new set of seconds; if interest
is shown in the new wording, this can be fast tracked into policy,
since discussion has already happened.
======================================================================
* #202054: ${perl:Depends} documentation incomplete
Package: debian-policy; Reported by: Matt Kraai
<kraai@alumni.cmu.edu>; 15 days old.
This needs to have the recommended wording for policy to make this a
proposal. The scope of the ${perl:Depends} variable needs to be
documented.
======================================================================
* #199849: unclear recommendation for debconf w/ dpkg-statoverride
Package: debian-policy; Severity: minor; Reported by: Eduard Bloch
<blade@debian.org>; Tags: patch; 31 days old.
There has been no discussion, and no seconds, for this proposal.
======================================================================
REJECTED
======================================================================
* #33251: document standard cross-compiler paths
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Santiago Vila
<sanvila@unex.es>; 4 years and 173 days old.
There seems to have been some confusion about what the right place
should be, whether to document current practice, or to standardize a
logical one, and whether the FHS says something relevant.
I am planning on moving this to the rejected pile, since no
consensus seems to have dawned, and it is unclear to me what is the
right thing to do.
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #39125: lintian: should maybe recognize /etc/init.d/*.sh ?
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Yann Dirson
<dirson@debian.org>; 4 years and 57 days old.
No discussion on this at all. There is no rationale for _why_
something has to be done here, just a bald statement to the
effect. Since nothing is broken, I think it is upto the proponents to
make a case here.
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #54985: debian-policy: handling of shared libraries
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Matthew
Vernon <matthew@sel.cam.ac.uk>; 3 years and 203 days old.
There does not seem to have been a consensus on this issue, or a
technically superior position (in my eyes).
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #62768: policy on kernel module sources needed (unpacked or not)
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: "Alan W.
Irwin" <irwin@beluga.phys.uvic.ca>; merged with #63598, #71805;
3 years and 104 days old.
* #63598: policy on kernel module sources needed (unpacked or not)
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Ulf
Jaenicke-Roessler <ujr@physik.phy.tu-dresden.de>; merged with #62768,
#71805; 3 years and 90 days old.
Why is this a policy issue? Do we really need to mandate absolute
conformity in modules packages? Whether you do a tar zvvfx in
MODULES_LOC or you do lndir there, you do get the same results.
======================================================================
======================================================================
* #65578: [PROPOSED] extra-Debian packages should have extra Priority
Package: debian-policy; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: Taketoshi
Sano <sano@debian.org>; 2 years and 156 days old.
No discussion at all, and I think that it blurs the priority and
sections a bit.
======================================================================
--
Everything I like is either illegal, immoral or fattening. Alexander
Woollcott
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
Reply to: