Bug#620109: Policy §3.5 (on Pre-Depends) does not reflect actual practice
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> I like your proposed alternative. Maybe the policy could say that you
> "should" (in the policy sense) thoroughly analyze the consequences and
> alternatives before adding pre-depends, and that one way to do so (in
> a friendly advice sense) is to ask on debian-devel?
Yes.
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> So, new proposal. Before adding new Pre-Depends,
>
> A. there should be a discussion on debian-devel or debian-release,
> to get eyeballs on the change and spot problems and easier
> alternatives;
Drop debian-release, it's not a general discussion list.
> B. debian-devel or debian-devel-announce should be at least notified,
> so other Debian developers can factor it into any plans they have
> for changing their own package relationships.
I don't think debian-devel-announce is warranted.
> In particular, this proposal would drop the requirement of consensus.
> Package maintainers generally know what's best; if not, there are
> other ways to deal with that (e.g., convincing them, or referring the
> issue to the ctte if the maintainer is beyond convincing).
Agreed.
In general I'm okay with reformulating section 3.5 to make it more obvious
why the review on -devel is a good idea.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)
Reply to: