"ext Andrew Flegg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Marius Vollmer
>
>> I am sure you notice the conflict here: whatever list you come up with
>> will be unsuitable for someone. You want strict policy enforcement,
>> based on community 'feelings'. How can that work?
>
> Can it be any worse than the mess we're in now?
(Yes, I actually think it could be worse, but I think we agree on the
important points, so let's not get distracted about this.)
> Having said that, perhaps the MOTU-style proposal of gatekeepers doing
> QA checks could help here. Deviation is permitted, if it gets through
> a gatekeeper:
Yes, I agree. I was proposing this, in a more fine fashion: in
addition to being able to say who goes in and who doesn't, the
gatekeeper could also say: You go in but I am going to change your
category to something sensible whether you want to or not. (I.e., the
category of a package can be overwritten by the repository.)
>> One approach in a situation where consensus is clearly beneficial is to
>> make a first shot at a concrete policy that everybody is supposed to
>> follow, but make it possible to deviate from that policy in practice.
>
> That's what we've got now!
Yeah, but you cut the important part:
At the same time, make it possible for people to improve policy
compliance by doing concrete work (i.e., enable them to fix
non-compliant things).
The gatekeepers would be the ones fixing non-compliance (by rejecting
violations, or by correcting them directly).
_______________________________________________
maemo-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
