Le Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 12:13:04AM -0800, Jonathan Nieder a écrit : > > I don't think policy should define how udebs work. The entire > installer is maintained by the d-i team, and it seems best if they > have freedom to change how it works without changing any documentation > maintained by other bodies. > > Policy section 8.6.4.2 does not say anything that could be interpreted > as meaning udebs are a subset of the packages the policy manual > defines. The proposed text in 697433 does. I think a single sentence > along the lines that udebs are not defined in this manual and to see > http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/doc/internals/ch03.html for their > definition would be enough to fix that. > > I'm getting the impression I'm the only person that thinks that, > though. :(
Hi Jonathan, I hope that people do not see the Policy as an obstacle for change or a tool to take away freedom from those doing the work. In my point of view, the Policy participates to Debian's attractiveness by providing a unified and synthethic reference on how the system is built and how it functions. I think that describing the udebs would fit with that goal. This said, it can not be done without the active participation of the d-i team, which I do not want to bother now. If you think that it is necessary to obtain the agreement of the d-i team to mention the udebs in #697433, please go ahead, but on my side, I do not think that there is a problem here. Cheers, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130113083356.ga17...@falafel.plessy.net
