Jeremiah: On that note, would you have some time (maybe later on) to work on producing a simple "annotated Debian Policy" applet?
While a Wiki in itself might not be useful, Russ has mentioned that perhaps there is room for an Annotated Policy Manual. Importantly, though, we need to remind users that it's not the official manual, but rather an official manual with user-supplied annotations, somewhat like AnnoCPAN. This way we can have the usefulness of a wiki but still ensure the safety of such an important document. If people want to easily propose a rewording, people could do so, and write an annotation like: "Proposed rewording: Blah blah blah, blah blah blah." -- then maintainers could easily merge whatever changes are a good idea with the policy, and ignore the rest (but leave them there in case others might think it's useful). If at a later time somebody comes across the annotation and decides that it should be used in Policy, then they could campaign for that. Cheers, Jonathan On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Jeremiah Foster<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jun 26, 2009, at 20:14, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> The hard work is taking a proposal for a concrete change, thinking >> through all the implications, getting buy-in from the affected people, >> and then writing a section of Policy for it that clearly communicates >> the issue. Secondarily, we need more reviewers after people do produce >> language, although that's gotten much better than it was. >> >> Proposing changes is the easy part. If we make that part even easier, >> we're going to end up with even more of a backlog. > > When you present the issue like that I can see that a wiki is probably not > tremendously useful. > > Warm regards, > > Jeremiah > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [email protected] > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
