Re: Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version"):
> Let me first say exactly what change I'd recommend:
> - out-of-date-standards-version should be I: or P: instead of W:
> - ancient-standards-version should remain W:
> - ancient-standards-version should be triggered when S-V contains a
>   release of Policy from the previous stable release cycle
...
> You argue that
> - whenever a maintainer uploads a package and S-V is out-of-date, they
>   should work through the relevant entries in the Policy Manual's
>   Upgrading Checklist
> - Policy Manual releases should be infrequent to avoid maintainers
>   having to do this too often
> 
> On the contrary, I argue that
> - the only thing that should be /required/ when uploading a package is
>   making the package non-trivially better than the current version in
>   unstable
> - updating S-V should never block uploading other improvements
> - there are good reasons to release the Policy Manual frequently, and
>   this should not be blocked by the expectation that everyone respond to
>   those new versions in their very next uploads.

Thank you, Sean, for arguing this so much better than I am doing.

> Also relevant here is Enrico's talk at DebConf17,[1] where he cautioned
> against manipulating volunteers into doing work.  Requiring prerequisite
> work that is not necessary for co-ordinating with other volunteers might
> well fall into that category.
> 
> [1] https://debconf17.debconf.org/talks/92/

I clearly must watch this talk.

Ian.