This one time, at band camp, Otavio Salvador said: > sean finney <seanius@seanius.net> writes: > > > On Thu, 2006-10-26 at 03:07 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> What's the importance of Debian Policy if RM team can do whatever they > >> want? How we can ensure that Debian has the minimal quality when it's > >> get release? > > > > the change would make it reflect the fact that this is already the > > reality--that yes packages that do not comply with policy are allowed in > > a stable release etc. we then put a certain level of trust in the RM's > > that they won't abuse this (we are already doing this too). > > Doing that we just lose the meaning of have something like Debian > Policy. So you prefer gutting policy? That makes no sense. > Why RM team wouldn't use it to meet the deadline and reducing the > overall quality of release? Let's be clear: the RMs don't lower the quality of packages (and there by the distribution), maintainers do. The RMs make decisions based on the shoddy work that we do. If our packages were bug free and policy compliant, there wouldn't be a need for this discussion. If you want a higher quality releasse than the one we as maintainers are likely to produce, then get out there and do some NMUs. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ,''`. Stephen Gran | | : :' : sgran@debian.org | | `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer | | `- http://www.debian.org | -----------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature