Le Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 09:09:00PM +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit : > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:29:26AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > I'm a big fan of *code* maintenance collab-main, and I do encourage the > > active autopkgtest hackers to move the code there. But I think it's a > > bad idea to have *spec* maintained in a very open/collaborative place > > --- again, I think DEP5 has taught us a thing or two about that. YMMV. > > I want to clarify: the issue with DEP5 in policy was that the DEP5 authors > were > aiming at immediate publication of the spec as it was, but as soon as it was > merged in policy a number of bug reports about typographical errors and > clarification enquiries were reported that the original authors did not have > time or interest in addressing prior to the publication. Thus this caused a > situation where valid bugs against the debian-policy package could not be > processed.
Hi Bill, the problem with DEP 5 was a disagreement on who the authors are, which led to a tough and very bitter conflict where even correcting typos became major pains. Thank you very much for ending this by accepting the spec in the Policy. After the ‘copyright-format’ specification was transferred to the Policy package, I think that it has being well maintained. I have spent ample time to triage bugs, answer to people, point them to previous discussions, etc. Have a nice day, -- 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: https://lists.debian.org/20140729220101.gb31...@falafel.plessy.net
