Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This one time, at band camp, Otavio Salvador said:
>> sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, 2006-10-26 at 03:07 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> >> What's the importance of Debian Policy if RM team can do whatever they
>> >> want? How we can ensure that Debian has the minimal quality when it's
>> >> get release?
>> >
>> > the change would make it reflect the fact that this is already the
>> > reality--that yes packages that do not comply with policy are allowed in
>> > a stable release etc. we then put a certain level of trust in the RM's
>> > that they won't abuse this (we are already doing this too).
>>
>> Doing that we just lose the meaning of have something like Debian
>> Policy.
>
> So you prefer gutting policy? That makes no sense.
>
>> Why RM team wouldn't use it to meet the deadline and reducing the
>> overall quality of release?
>
> Let's be clear: the RMs don't lower the quality of packages (and there
> by the distribution), maintainers do. The RMs make decisions based on
> the shoddy work that we do. If our packages were bug free and policy
> compliant, there wouldn't be a need for this discussion. If you want
> a higher quality releasse than the one we as maintainers are likely to
> produce, then get out there and do some NMUs.
Really? Have you read the message where Luk said that #!/bin/sh bugs
using no POSIX features isn't RC? That just make me think one thing:
"Let's release fast, whatever this means!"
--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
