'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 enforce? I hope you don't wish to flog or flame violators? Since we are all conscientious people here, it seems that we would be better off using bugs and policy as a means of _persuading_ others to follow us. Not as something required. I think of policy and bugs as a cultural procedure to more formally advise developers and users on the collective wisdom of the Project. I agree that developing impediments to bad packages is important. But I don't see any value in trying to enforce those impediments. Humorous note: Whenever I get called to jury duty, I tell the judge "why of course, I will take your pronouncements and the entire history of law under advisement in rendering my decision". For some odd reason they usually dismiss me at this point. I guess the judicial system is not as open-minded as I am :) -- Christopher J. Fearnley | Linux/Internet Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Design Science Revolutionary http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf | Explorer in Universe ftp://ftp.netaxs.com/people/cjf | "Dare to be Naïve" -- Bucky Fuller -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
