> Cc: Debian Developers list <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>,
> Debian policy list <debian-policy@lists.debian.org>
> From: Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 27 Apr 1998 14:47:23 -0500
> Lines: 44
>
> Hi,
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm. I think I like the idea of the policy documents being the
> law, and the technical committee like the justices, who lay down
> interpretations (which are referred to latter as and adjunct to prior
> law).
Exactly.
I think the problem has arisen because 1) the policy documents
have not sufficiently delineated the difference between prescriptive
(shall, must) provisions and (strong) recommendations (should, must),
and 2) because some (many?) developers disagree with some policy
provisions and feel that they have had insufficient input in the
process of formulating policy. Christian has started the process of
rectifying the first item.
I believe the remedy for the second point is _not_ to make policy
some vague advisory document. I believe the remedy is to establish a
more formal policy making process. It would probably be necessary to
provide for some type of super-majority to establish prescriptive
policy provisions, with, perhaps less support required for suggestive
provisions.
In some cases it seems that some developers have failed to read
the lists for some lengthy period of time, then found that policy
provisions had been adopted that they find objectionable. A formal
policy making process should provide for a process to change it when
the developer community agrees it is desirable.
Bob
--
_
|_) _ |_ Robert D. Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|_) (_) |_) Palm City, FL USA PGP Key ID: A8E40EB9
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
