On Tue, Apr 21 2009, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Don Armstrong wrote:
>
>> So long as we have an implementation which works for the vast majority
>> of cases we can file bugs to make it work for the few cases where it
>> doesn't. (Or the output can just be slightly broken in those cases;
>> it's not like that's a huge problem.)
>
> IMHO this whole discussion is the problem. I just wanted to define
> rules to enable us filing bugs. The discussion just runs circles
> about the next step before doing the first.
If by rules you mean policy (which seems likely, since your goal
was to enable us to file bugs), that is not how policy works. Policy
wants a finished design, which means a tested design, and that means
youneed to know how to implement things before it becomes policy. And
policy is all about not having to file too many bugs in the first
place, so trying to get something going to enable us to file bugs first
is just plain … wrong headed. Even wishlist bugs, in advance of a
working design, are a bad idea -- since the implementation might cause
the draft design to be modified.
manoj
--
Education is what survives when what has been learnt has been
forgotten. B.F. Skinner
Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
