On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Copying the debian-policy list, since this conversation is basically about
> that.
>
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I don't think policy changes need to be seconded. We have a policy team
> > that should decide on what comes in policy and what not. Although, it
> > more looks like it's just 1 person doing all the work.
>
> > I sometimes feel that they go to slow which changing things, and I'm not
> > really sure it's a good or bad thing.
>
> > Some of those currently open bugs against the policy package, like your
> > ~ in version numbers, really shouldn't be a problem to get into the
> > policy. I don't think anybody has a problem with it. I think it's just
> > that no new version of the policy has been made yet.
>
> Well, policy-process is still shipped with the debian-policy package, and
> my experience in the past is that when I follow that process, the changes
> go into Policy fairly quickly. Certainly seconding would show that
> someone reviewed the wording of my proposed ~ patch and has confirmed that
> it sounds like an accurate and implementable description of their
> behavior.
>
> Maybe Manoj could weigh in on how he sees the current process?
That document says things like:
The group that decides on policy should be the group of
developers on the debian-policy mailing list, which is how it
was always done; so the group of policy maintainers have no
real power over policy.
And that is not the impression I get from it.
Also, I believe this has changed since they are now delegates of the
DPL:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/07/msg00002.html
But it's unclear to me what this exactly means.
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
