>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
Anthony> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 10:28:50AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> >>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes: Anthony> Personally, I don't see putting stuff in policy as removing Anthony> lattitude. See also http://bugs.debian.org/102213 . >> That has other problems. What may happen then, since policy >> becomes optional with a note in a README, Anthony> No, policy does not become optional with a note in the Anthony> README. Policy becomes optional only when what it suggests Anthony> is technically wrong in the given situation. We're not here Anthony> to codify random opinions, we're here to document ways of Anthony> packaging that are technically _better_. Is there a difference? Who decides that the policy is wrong? If I can unilaterally decide policy is technically wrong, and say so in the README, and proceed to ignore policy, then policy is indeed optional. If, however, there are procedures in place to ensure that the opinion about the policy being technically wrong are widely held, then it would be easy enough to list the error in an non-normative errata document in the policy package/web page somewhere. What are the checks and balances proposed? Anthony> If it turns out one of things we put in policy _isn't_ Anthony> technically better, well, it's much better that developers Anthony> do what _is_ technically better than blindly follow rules Anthony> like brainless automatons. Well, I still see no reason here that contradicts the statement that this makes policy optional, and largely irrelevant when it comes to tough or controversial decisions, since no decision is likely to convince everyone, and if people can just ignore policy when they disagree with it, the cooperative infrastructure is damaged. >> Making policy optional,and using that to include >> non-technical, trivial, and unnecesary detials into policy is a >> stupendously bad idea. Anthony> Good thing that's not the idea being talked about then, isn't it? I think it is. Anthony> But by the looks of things you've already gone into Anthony> defensive rhetoric mode, so there's probably still no chance Anthony> of actually discussing this, so just forget I said Anthony> anything. Geez. Interesting cop out. manoj -- Semper Fi, dude. Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
