On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 05:59:14PM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On one hand, I completely agree with you that DEP-8 has already left the > autopkgtest nest¹, and that discussing changes in a more neutral place > would be good. > > ¹ I myself use sadt when creating/changing test suites a lot > > On the other hand, with the recent increase in autopkgtest/DEP8 usage, > we have been discovering several new needs which often have an impact on > the specification (see e.g. the changelog for the recent 3.2 release), > so freezing DEP-8 right now might hamper the development. I totally agree with you, Antonio. And I do *not* mean to imply that moving the spec under the debian-policy umbrella equates to *freezing* the spec. For me it is just an attempt to have the spec in a place that is more tool-neutral, and where we can actually edit stuff (once a DEP gets ACCEPTED, it ceases to be such a place). But you're right that we should better clarify what would be the editing process for sub-policies that get integrated into the debian-policy package. Can someone, maybe with past experience on other sub-policies (e.g. the perl one), comment on what are the recommended work-flows for maintaining sub-policies under the debian-policy umbrella? I'm also open to other suggestions about where the "autopkgtest" spec should belong. The only think I know for sure is that it should *not* belong to a random wiki.d.o page, editable by everyone --- DEP5 has told me that that is not a good idea. It should be a place somehow controlled, associated to a list where interested stakeholders can discuss perspective changes before acting. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature