Bug#190753: About dropping the ‘should’ recommendation to rename binary programs using a suffix to indicate their programming language.
Le Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 08:12:25PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>
> The basic idea from how I look at it is that Policy uses consensus as a
> stabilizing factor as well as an approval process. This is typical for
> very conservative document maintenance, such as for standards. In order
> to change the document, one needs consensus, but once one has that
> consensus and the change has been made, that change persists not for so
> long as it has consensus but rather until there's consensus to change it.
> In other words, the barrier is to the document change, rather than
> approval of a specific thing the document says. At the time this change
> was proposed, I think it clearly had consensus (indeed, from the bug log,
> it was apparently unanimous).
Point taken. The reason why I started this discussion is that I care for the
Policy (otherwise I could simply have ignored it). I agree that once a decision
is taken it must be difficult to challenge it.
I will leave a couple of weeks for absent people to provide extra insights in
this discussion, and then bring the issue to the technical comittee.
I would like to thank everybody for this discussion, that despite our
disagrements was nice and productive.
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: