[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Policy progress

On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 07:36:11PM +0200, Stefan Gybas wrote:
> I only wanted to show that it has been impossible the get major Policy
> changes accepted in the past 4 years.

As opposed to the six years before that, when major policy changes happened
all the time? :)

> Improving the init scripts to at least catch up with other major
> distributions (status option, exit codes, chkconfig, colored output on
> supported consoles, ...) is less work than e.g. adding another
> architecture -- but it requires consensus among developers.

And how do you suppose this consensus thing works if you can't get a
consensus over the said policy changes? I sense a grave misunderstanding...

> you can file an RC bug and the maintainer has to fix it (or you can NMU).
> But you can't do this for new features unless Policy prescribes them.

That's an unhealthy fixation on serious bugs if you ask me.

> >Probably only if you file bugs without any rationale. If not, those
> >maintainers need some attitude readjustment.
> Ok, let's test this: I'll file 10 bug reports with example code and 
> explanation against packages with init scripts that use 
> start-stop-daemon asking the maintainer to add the status option and 
> adjust the return code according to the current proposal. I really fear 
> that I will not be very successful unless this becomes part of the 
> Policy, even if I submit patches. But we'll see...

Possibly. Note that "without any rationale" is broad -- it may have a
rationale, but with which people are not satisfied. That's also due to
that whole consensus thing mentioned above. :)

     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to: