On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 01:58:31AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Disclaimer: the below is a half-baked long-term proposal for a process > change. If you're wondering about how to do useful work today, please > ignore it. But comments welcome. > > Hi, > > My experience has been that the policy process works pretty well when > a policy delegate is involved in the discussion. Seconds for good > proposals are not hard to find, most parties have good faith, and the > result is that the proposals that get adopted are well reviewed and > carefully thought out. > > On the other hand, when policy delegates are not involved, it seems to > me that some participants are frightened by the complex process into > not participating, and others are perhaps not fearful enough, > resulting in a chaotic discussion. > > I would like to propose an alternative policy process. In practice > for policy delegates, I expect it might be similar to the current one, > but for contributors I think it would be more intuitive. It would > work like this: > > 1. Person proposing a policy amendment describes the change, with any > supporting information she can find to help explain it. > > 2. Discussion. > > 3. When the amendment looks, in the policy delegates' opinion, like > good policy (they may decide what that means), a patch gets > applied to the debian-policy repository.
In my opinion as a policy editor, the major roadblock in the policy is that someone needs to write the patch, and well, I do not see how a different process would alleviate the need for a patch. Also some of the proposals are very technical and policy editor might lacks personnal knowledge about the issue, and so they need external help. Cheers, Bill. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111128113448.GD23853@yellowpig
