Hi,
Raul == Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Raul It's that things which people haven't invented yet concept which
Raul has had me objecting to this concept of policy must be
Raul followed. If you look at policy as a set of *goals* rather
Raul than a set of *rules* I think you'll have
Hi,
James == James Troup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
James Are you being nasty to me because I FUBARed kernel-package or
James what?
;-)
manoj
--
We are on a threshold of a change in the universe comparable to the
transition from nonlife to life. Hans Moravec (on artificial
'Manoj Srivastava wrote:'
Well, I think if one is not constrained to follow policy, nor
required to do so, I see no reason to actually follow policy. Why is
it so bad to require policy to be followed?
How would you enforce it? Why require something which your police
force cannot
Hi,
Chris == Chris Fearnley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris 'Manoj Srivastava wrote:'
Well, I think if one is not constrained to follow policy, nor
required to do so, I see no reason to actually follow policy. Why
is it so bad to require policy to be followed?
Chris How would you enforce it?
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish you would talk to Raul directly. He points out that
violations of policy shall be enforced thus:
a) since policy is supposed to be authoritative for bug filers, and
policy violation can be flagged as a bug.
b) any disputes about
On 29 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Dale == Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dale The Policy Statement is a set of rules for the behavior of
Dale developers, set down by the ruling body, sometimes referred to
Dale as the government. When those rules are viewed as more
Dale
Hi,
Philip == Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Philip 2) this is going way off topic, and has been quite tedious for
Philip some time.
OK. I give. And, on the principle that if you can't beat 'em,
join 'em, I now agree with Jame Troup and Dale Scheetz and formally
declare that
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK. I give. And, on the principle that if you can't beat 'em,
join 'em, I now agree with Jame Troup and Dale Scheetz and formally
declare that Policy does not govern may packages from this point on,
and shall close any policy related Bugs
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK. I give. And, on the principle that if you can't beat 'em, join
'em, I now agree with Jame Troup and Dale Scheetz and formally
declare that Policy does not govern may packages from this point on,
and shall close any policy related Bugs ASAP.
Are
On 28 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I prefer the codification of rules that have to be followed
and putting them out in the open, rather than continuing to depend on
the judgement of a few good people in perpetuity. Some have called my
view fascist.
Codification of
Hi,
Dale == Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dale The Policy Statement is a set of rules for the behavior of
Dale developers, set down by the ruling body, sometimes referred to
Dale as the government. When those rules are viewed as more
Dale important than the people participating, that
On 29 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Dale == Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dale The Policy Statement is a set of rules for the behavior of
Dale developers, set down by the ruling body, sometimes referred to
Dale as the government. When those rules are viewed as more
Dale
Hi,
Guy == Guy Maor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Guy Christian Schwarz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't see how this conflicts with the proposed
constitution. Please give me more info on that.
Guy The constitution places no limitations on the developer's
Guy authority with regard to their own
Guy == Guy Maor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Guy The constitution places no limitations on the developer's
Guy authority with regard to their own work. Your version says that
Guy the maintainers must follow policy.
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is that such a bad thing, really? I
Hi,
Raul == Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Raul Guy == Guy Maor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Guy The constitution places no limitations on the developer's
Guy authority with regard to their own work. Your version says that
Guy the maintainers must follow policy.
Raul Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You do have a tendency to jump to untenable positions. Who
said that we shall remove all packages with bugs or all packages that
fail to follow policy?
You made an ambiguous statement. You made a statement about how policy
should have more
On 28 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Is that such a bad thing, really? I would rather that the
policy documents be corrected, and held as a set of rules htat
have to be followed, woth an exception for the items that happen to
Debian is great and everything, but it
Hi,
Raul == Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Raul Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You do have a tendency to jump to untenable positions. Who said
that we shall remove all packages with bugs or all packages that
fail to follow policy?
Raul You made an ambiguous statement. You
Apologies are due for my not trimming the crossposting before; I meant to,
but I forgot to. As I understand things, there should be no crossposting
amongst the debian mailing lists.
If I make further comment, therefore, I will be careful to trim the
mail distribution to one of them only, and
On 21 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi.
Philip Does that satisfy both sides ?
This satisfies me. Indeed, this has been my position all the
while, but evidently the joys of the fray and the intellectual
stimulation offered by the flow of reason has been a feast for my
soul,
Hi,
What is this policy group you are talking about? AFAIK, there
is no such beast; there is just an public, open mailing list, which
is more and less than a formal Policy group.
The mailing list was formed to reduce clutter on the devel
list, which is rapidly becoming a
21 matches
Mail list logo
