On Tue, 08 Sep 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > - Where should discussions occur? Should we re-use debian-policy@, since > both documents are a bit related? Or use another list? I would > personally prefer to use another list (-policy@ is already quite > busy), but I could be convinced to use -pol...@.
Discussions happen in the bugs. I think using -policy is best, because the set of people who care about reviewing policy in general also care about reviewing dev-ref (except that they have never gone out of their way to subscribe to the dev-ref PTS). Quite often we discuss whether material is for policy or for dev-ref. > - Changes process. The policy one > (http://wiki.debian.org/PolicyChangesProcess) is too complex and > inadequate for dev-ref. I'm proposing the following documentation for > the process: I agree on almost everything. > For (A) and (B), once a proposal has been made, has been seconded by at > least one DD, and some time (e.g one week) has passed to give others the > chance to voice their concerns, the change can be made. Ack. > For (C), non-editorial changes should be discussed more widely (on > -devel@ or -project@), and consensus should be ensured before going > forward. The point is that -policy is already "wider" than what we have. So -policy should be enough in general, no need to impose any external forward. That said anyone can forward a proposal elsewhere if s/he believes that there's no clear consensus yet. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
