Re: copyright-format: "with <keywords> exception" underspecified
Le Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 08:59:57PM -0600, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 11:17:40AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Please explain to the project why you are forking a work that is now
> > developed in the debian-policy package.
> This is not a finalized DEP and I have not agreed to have it developed in
> the debian-policy package using the policy process.
> > This transition was impulsed by Lars at a time where you were co-drivers,
> > and you have not objected to it.
> That is incorrect. I have objected repeatedly to it.
> Message-ID: <email@example.com>
> Message-ID: <20110911084518.GD22050@havelock.liw.fi>
> Message-ID: <20110912095305.GA14021@virgil.dodds.net>
I really hope that people will read these emails and make their opinion.
- In April, Lars wrote that you would send patches to the DEP “about next
weekend or so”. He asked the patches to be written against the version
in the debian-policy Git repository, and you have not objected. But
indeed, you never sent patches.
- In September, Lars informed us that you would “take care of getting any
linguistic or other changes”.
- You then wrote that you would “continue to follow the DEP process on
debian-project” and send a patch to the Policy maintainers. As of today,
you did close to nothing.
In the meantime, the work continued without you. It was also not started
by you. You just were the first to self-appoint as a DEP driver, and ask
for a special role because of this. I think that it is a complete misuse
of the DEP process.
Given that the document in the debian-policy package continues to evolve,
I started to synchronise the HTML version on the dep website.
You repeatedly write that the document is not ready, but never indicate what
has to be corrected. I think that it is time to share your concerns so that
we can move forward collectively, in an open and public way, as it was when
this project was started.
PS to Craig:
DEP 5 is not part of the Debian Policy, but it has been proposed and accepted
that it will be distributed through this package. While it is not strictly
necessary to follow the policy changes process, it has been done that way and
in my opinion, it works well to organise, structure and document the
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan