On Oct 19, 2015, at 09:04 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: >Debian Python Policy¹ is something every single packages that extends >Python should follow. There are many teams (more than 4) each of them >can have their own policy that extends DPP.
This is an important distinction that I don't think is really captured anywhere. Let me rephrase it to see if I'm capturing your sentiment. There is Debian Python Policy which describes the standards for publishing Python libraries and applications within the Debian archive. It is a Debian Project-wide standard, irrespective of which team, if any, is maintaining the Python package. There is the DPMT, a team for co-maintaining Python libraries. It has its own policy document for how those libraries are maintained, and adheres to DPP for publishing those libraries in the archive. There is the PAPT, a team for co-maintaining Python applications. While there may be overlap with DPMT (e.g. some upstream packages provide both libraries and applications), PAPT has its own policy document for how those applications are maintained, and adheres to DPP for publishing those applications in the archive. >> and maybe more. This is crazy! We really need to consolidate all this >> information. > >why? again, if you want to describe common Python related things - DPP >is the place, if it's team specific, please allow each team to have >their own rules. My concern here is discoverability and knowing the procedures for making changes to the various policies. Am I the only one who thinks that it's harder than necessary to find the right information? Cheers, -Barry
