On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 12:00:29PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > Hello Adrian, > > Thank you for your continued effort to get this bug resolved. > > On Sat, Mar 10 2018, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > >> Please expand on why you think this is the way we have to proceed. > > > > you skipped the part of my email with the explanation: > > > > with such a piecemeal approach > > we risk fragmentation based on debhelper compat level used, with every > > new compat level installing different files in different locations. > > This is not inevitable. What I am envisaging is: > > - we hash out our preferred solution either in this bug or in the > debhelper bug, with the debhelper maintainer having the final say on > what gets implemented > - debhelper implements all of that solution at exactly one compat level > - the archive starts to use that compat level > - Policy is updated.
This ensures that policy will always be horribly outdated. > This is the standard way to make changes to Policy. The alternative is > releases of Policy rendering many packages buggy, and that is undesirable. >... A new debhelper compat level making packages buggy according to policy is what is desirable? > Our delegation gives the Policy Editors editorial authority over the > contents of the Policy Manual, but by means of the Policy Changes > Process we delegate that authority back to the body of DDs. > > That means that changes have to establish consensus. How do we > establish consensus on an issue like this, just by talking about it > where everyone has a view? That's extremely hard. There's no way to > bring the discussion to a close, and so the bug is still open after 10 > years. Let me repeat what I already wrote earlier in this bug: IMHO the way forward is to find a consensus text for a policy change, Cc debian-devel on the proposal, and if no objections are raised release a new policy with these changes. > What we can do in this case is shortcircuit that process of establishing > consensus by means of debhelper. The debhelper maintainer has authority > over what debhelper will implement. So he implements something. If > it's basically a sensible convention, almost everyone will start using > it, even if it is not their number one choice of solution. But then we > have enough of a consensus, so it's no longer problematic to change The Policy Editors are a delegation, and the debhelper maintainer is just a random person who happens to maintain this specific package. Precedent is also that the Policy Editors do use their powers to push through even a change that makes thousands of packages buggy after an objection has been raised: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=844431#334 I begin to wonder whether I should take this personally. > Sean Whitton cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed