On Tuesday 27 June 2006 13:46, Frank Küster wrote: --cut-- > > Why do you think "are all normative and authoritative", is not correct, > > if sub-policies are part of debian-policy or referenced to by the above > > mentioned 1.4 debian-policy paragraph ? > > Sorry, I misparsed this sentence, or rather I was confused by Ian's > claim that there is no official policy procedure any more, but that > instead changes are made at the discretion of the respective package's > maintainer. I now assume that Ian's claim is wrong; consequently I > withdraw my statement that there's anything incorrect in your suggested > wording. > > I still don't see why the change is necessary.
Well, I'm not insisting anymore on any change. I have been confised by 1.4 (and I do believe I'm not the only one), then being answered by the ML, and I guess that these answers are explanative enough to hit 1.4 and prevent further uncertainces like that. It is fine with me if you find that useless. I've already got my answers by the mailing list. As an additional side effect there is a 'policy process' in debian-policy which seems to not be followed anymore for evaluating new 'sub-policies' or whatever changes and/or additions happend to be suggested. There are at least two opinions on that topic (yours and Ian's) and I'm not going to judge which is right ;-) -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
