Re: what is policy about?
>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
Anthony> http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt is a
Anthony> good start at separating out (3), and I'm happy for the
Anthony> release team to continue maintaining that, even though it
Anthony> obviously is a little redundant wrt policy.
I think I can see the point that Manoj is trying to make' but I can
also see your point.
It seems reasonable for the release team to maintain 3 provided that
the intent is to eventually make the best practices in policy be
release requirements. I'd see it as a problem if there were some best
practice in policy that was implemented by a good fraction of the
packages but the release team were not willing to accept that practice
as a release requirement. I would not see it as a problem if the
release team didn't want to make something a release requirement
because doing so would be too hard to check, would remove too many
packages, etc.
I think I might also see it as a problem if the release team made some
release requirement which conflicted with policy or for which there
was not a consensus in favor of in the debian-policy community. I'm
not sure though; I suspect I'd have to see some examples before I knew
what I thought.
What I'm trying to say seems to boil down to it's important that
release requirements and best practices are relatively closely
coordinated. I also think that the release team probably shouldn't be
doing much inventing of requirements, but rather should be selecting
from requirements proposed through policy and other channels for those
that are consistent with the practical requirements of a release.
--Sam
Reply to: