Helmut, Simon, Thank you for your arguments. I myself find them compelling.
I think that I now understand better why Ian made reference to the Debian Policy process. If there was a bug called "abolish the system-log-daemon virtual package" against bin:debian-policy, then your messages could be copied verbatim to that bug. So, I think we could pass a resolution saying that the Policy Changes Process should be followed before anyone is asked to remove reference to the system-log-daemon virtual package from d/control. It's always true that Policy discussions that cannot reach consensus can be referred to the TC, but we could also explicitly state in our resolution that we would like it to come back to us if that process fails to establish consensus. I'm suggesting this because I think the Policy process will either resolve the issue, or get clearer on the stakes, such that the TC can then make a decision about what Debian will prioritise. We would also be encouraging a more appropriate escalation: try other decision-making procedures in the project, and use the TC as a last resort. How about it? -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
