David Bremner writes ("Bug#891216: Requre d-devel consultation for epoch bump"):
> I find the existing use of the debian-devel list in policy strange, and
> am unenthusiastic about expanding it.  It's not a "must-read" list for
> debian contributors, and it is (or was, last time I subscribed) an
> extremely noisy forum.  I concede that your proposed use of the list is
> consistent with existing ones.

The point of gettting review from d-devel is not to notify everyone
who might be interested.  It is to get some peer review from the
cross-section of people who _do_ read that list.

There is a lot of expertise there and escalating difficult things
there is very effective.  (It's less good for things which are
politically contentious, but as a project we are very poor at those
and d-devel is often the least bad option.  Anyway, that's not
relevant here.)

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Reply via email to