Re: Policy process (was: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?)
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: Copying the debian-policy list, since this conversation is basically about that. Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't think policy changes need to be seconded. We have a policy team that should decide on what comes in policy and what not. Although, it more looks like it's just 1 person doing all the work. I sometimes feel that they go to slow which changing things, and I'm not really sure it's a good or bad thing. Some of those currently open bugs against the policy package, like your ~ in version numbers, really shouldn't be a problem to get into the policy. I don't think anybody has a problem with it. I think it's just that no new version of the policy has been made yet. Well, policy-process is still shipped with the debian-policy package, and my experience in the past is that when I follow that process, the changes go into Policy fairly quickly. Certainly seconding would show that someone reviewed the wording of my proposed ~ patch and has confirmed that it sounds like an accurate and implementable description of their behavior. Maybe Manoj could weigh in on how he sees the current process? That document says things like: The group that decides on policy should be the group of developers on the debian-policy mailing list, which is how it was always done; so the group of policy maintainers have no real power over policy. And that is not the impression I get from it. Also, I believe this has changed since they are now delegates of the DPL: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/07/msg2.html But it's unclear to me what this exactly means. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Policy process (was: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?)
Copying the debian-policy list, since this conversation is basically about that. Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't think policy changes need to be seconded. We have a policy team that should decide on what comes in policy and what not. Although, it more looks like it's just 1 person doing all the work. I sometimes feel that they go to slow which changing things, and I'm not really sure it's a good or bad thing. Some of those currently open bugs against the policy package, like your ~ in version numbers, really shouldn't be a problem to get into the policy. I don't think anybody has a problem with it. I think it's just that no new version of the policy has been made yet. Well, policy-process is still shipped with the debian-policy package, and my experience in the past is that when I follow that process, the changes go into Policy fairly quickly. Certainly seconding would show that someone reviewed the wording of my proposed ~ patch and has confirmed that it sounds like an accurate and implementable description of their behavior. Maybe Manoj could weigh in on how he sees the current process? -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Policy process (was: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?)
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't think policy changes need to be seconded. We have a policy team that should decide on what comes in policy and what not. Although, it more looks like it's just 1 person doing all the work. I sometimes feel that they go to slow which changing things, and I'm not really sure it's a good or bad thing. Some of those currently open bugs against the policy package, like your ~ in version numbers, really shouldn't be a problem to get into the policy. I don't think anybody has a problem with it. I think it's just that no new version of the policy has been made yet. Well, policy-process is still shipped with the debian-policy package, and my experience in the past is that when I follow that process, the changes go into Policy fairly quickly. Certainly seconding would show that someone reviewed the wording of my proposed ~ patch and has confirmed that it sounds like an accurate and implementable description of their behavior. Hello, As a debian-policy denizen, I am quick to second proposal I like. However, here this a purely the description of what dpkg do. What matter is whether the text is faithful to the implementation, not whether I like it or not, and i don't feel qualified to vet the text. However, there is at least 2 dpkg maintainers, they are very qualified to check it, and I expected they would second the proposal. If they did not see it, I suggest to forward it to them asking for review and second. Cheers, -- Bill. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
