Hi,
I think one of the reasons that sets Debian apart is the
Policy document. It makes it possible for the different components of
Debian to interact. A Package can depend on other packages and the
policy (like LaTeX2HTML putting icons in /vaw/www and knowing that
the Debian HTTP server can find them).
I do not think the Policy is something we follow when we feel
like following it. Any set of rules under that paradigm is
undependable, and hence useless. As soon as policy becomes optional,
the synergy and coperation between Debian packages shall begin to
break down. (which is one reason why changes in policy should not be
entered into lightly).
With the Changlog files put in the correct place, I can set a
program to generate a changlog for the whole distribution, parse the
bugs fixed [as soon as the suto closure of bugs policy comes into
effect], do a list of changes for the net section, or anything like
that. Muck with the names of changelogs, and it is impossible to even
think further.
Please do not think that the preceding psuedo-example thrown
at you at the top off my head is the only reason for consistancy and
dependablity of the policy mandated changelog names; just because my
imagination is at fault does not undermine the fact that such
dependable consistency is required to build any grand edifice on top
of things.
I strogly aver that policy should indeed be considred as cast
in stone; and we use the the procedures in effect to change policy to
improve it if there are flaws in the document, rather than
undermining it by flouting its directives.
manoj
who looks at policy like he does at the ANSI C standard. The epitome
of authoritative.
--
Always do what you are afraid to do. Emerson
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
