On Sun, 01 Nov 2009, Steve Langasek wrote: > My only concern is that the ftp archive checks not be used to force changes > in Policy. > > If the set of tags being drawn from is limited to those that are recognized > as violations of Policy "must" requirements, then I have no opinion on who > should decide which tags are blockers and which ones are not. If the > candidate tags are *not* limited to that set, then I think we have a > governance problem regardless of who's driving.
What about using those tags to achieve release goals? For example, the support of 3.0 (quilt) by default would benefit from getting rid of: http://lintian.debian.org/tags/patch-modifying-debian-files.html http://lintian.debian.org/tags/quilt-patch-with-non-standard-options.html Otherwise, I generally agree with your point of view. I welcome this new infrastructure but the set of tags used should be limited to clear violations of must directives, really broken packages, and other consensual tags that allow us to reach our current set of goals. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
