On 01 May 2003 09:46:17 +0200, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 00:22, Bill Allombert wrote:
>> We should focus on /run for now.
> OK, I'm glad you are going to focus on this.
> It looks like you will need to get policy changed before the
> maintainers of the affected packages will implement /run/.
There are a few obstacles with this approach.
a) Policy changes require consensus
I see no such consensus emerging; Indeed, the people who manage
the packages most affected by this change seem to be unconvinced,
based on a message you wrote recently
b) Policy documents current practice. Changing policy is necesarily
something that is not taken lightly, especially when a large
number of packages are affected, or there is a large user visible
change, or, as in this case, it would involve Debian being
different from other distributions and Unices. Indeed, the
canonical method has been for a sub-policy document to be created
independently, and getting the affected maintainers to ratify and
implement this document, and then, once things are working, to get
the document into policy.
c) Policy is not a stick to make people not convinced of the change
to conform -- at the very least one needs to get the buy in of the
people who need to be doing the work.
As it stands, a means that you need to get the tech ctte to
change policy, or ram through a GR; or come up with a means of
convincing the opposition of the merits of this proposal.
manoj
--
A "practical joker" deserves applause for his wit according to its
quality. Bastinado is about right. For exceptional wit one might
grant keelhauling. But staking him out on an anthill should be
reserved for the very wittiest. Lazarus Long
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
