On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Jonathan Lange <j...@mumak.net> wrote: > You could also do what Drizzle did and make a rule that we all know is > arbitrary and not entirely correct but is certainly easy to follow. > This would be a fitting break from the Launchpad (as-a-product) > tradition of covering every imaginable use case. > > Another idea would be to make the policy even stronger. Say that from > now patches must reduce maintenance cost, and specify what that might > mean: make LP faster, make dev cycle faster, remove code, remove the > need for documentation, increase architectural transparency etc.
Thats an interesting concept; I think I prefer the 'not make worse' approach because it allows folk to tread water if needed. -Rob _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : launchpad-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
