Re: Upcoming Policy plans
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Russ,
Of course, I am more of an outside observer than an active participant
in Policy, so take this with a grain of salt.
On 26/02/2012 21:44, Russ Allbery wrote:
> First, I plan on releasing 3.9.3.1 next week with only informative
> changes. I want to update the wording of the copyright format
> specification following subsequent discussion, and there are also
> a variety of informative bugs that have accumulated in the BTS.
> Please don't merge normative changes until after that release.
This seems reasonable - if the changes are only informative then they
shouldn't require too much discussion/stir up too much controversy.
> Next, there are three major areas where I think Policy is
> obviously deficient and on which I want to focus effort. This
> doesn't rule out merging other things, of course, but I want to
> make sure these get done. They are symbols files, triggers, and
> multiarch.
Agreed on all counts. I've been out of the game for awhile and it
would be nice to have something in Policy to read about multiarch, so
that I can catch up on the state of the art. I've been following some
of the email threads as well as the wiki.d.o page on MultiArch, but
I've found Policy to be a more thorough and better written guide to
many of the different pieces that make Debian work.
I think of the three mentioned items, MultiArch is the most important,
as it affects the most things, followed by symbol files. As you note,
we've gotten away without the trigger documentation for awhile,
probably in part because it's not needed as often as symbol files and
MultiArch are.
> What does everyone think about this plan?
Having read some of your later comments, I have to admit that I think
your plan is quite ambitious, but long overdue. I will keep an eye on
this mailing list and try to devote some spare cycles to proofreading
the proposed changes.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)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=o0Z2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: