Bug#172436: this proposal
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:13:12 -0500, Joey Hess <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> If the purpose of debian policy is to document existing best
Well, no. That's the developers reference. Policy is a
document to implement the minimal set of rules that are required for
improved integration and cooperation of programs -- preferably only
after these rules have been designed, implemented, tweaked, and known
to work well.
> then this proposal should be accepted, since that is what
> it does. Leaving it sitting open for 1 year has only resulted in
> more or less everything in debian implementing BROWSER without it
> being in policy.
And there is nothing wrong with best practices not being in
policy, or packages developing stuff that policy is mum about.
Having said that, this proposal does indeed fall into the
category of selecting one way out of a myriad of equally viable
proposals, and it does help provide a consistent way for different
parts of Debian to call up a browser, so coming to a consensus on
this is a good thing.
Could you address aj's questions, which are some of the last
comments on the bug page? That alternative seems, on the surface, to
"Anything worth doing is worth doing badly." Chesterton
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <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