Hi,
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Well, to take a different tack, what is the point of a policy
>> document at all when anyone can say "well, my package is an
>> exception and need not comply to policy."? If one ma
On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Well, to take a different tack, what is the point of a policy
> document at all when anyone can say "well, my package is an
> exception and need not comply to policy."? If one may take that
> stance, I see no point in having a policy doc
In the message identified by <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thank you. That was the point I was so poorly trying to make. No
> denigration was intended (just a bit of jealousy at not having any spare
> time myself)
I'm not a developer, but I see how the debian IRC
Hi,
Well, to take a different tack, what is the point of a policy
document at all when anyone can say "well, my package is an
exception and need not comply to policy."? If one may take that
stance, I see no point in having a policy document in the first
place.
manoj
Why hav
On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Dale> The desire is to create a distribution that installs in the
> Dale> smallest disk space possible. I saw that requirement as being a
> Dale> smaller one than the functionality requirem
Hi,
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> The desire is to create a distribution that installs in the
Dale> smallest disk space possible. I saw that requirement as being a
Dale> smaller one than the functionality requirement, and thus
Dale> "violated" the letter of the policy
On Mon, 20 Apr 1998, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> Also note, that I just sent a proposal of a new `maintainer policy' to
> debian-policy. Everyone is invited to take part of the discussion.
>
As this issue appears to effect all maintainers, I would ask that the
discusion be carried out on debian
On Mon, 20 Apr 1998, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 1998 at 03:57:27PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > > By the way, I do not think I am alone in regarding the Policy
> > > as a standards document; a quick (informal) poll on IRC showed a
> >
On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> Hmm. I agree about the exceptions, if any. The severity idea
> sounds interesting, though I think it should be evaluated more
> thoroughly. It may require the Policy document to be totally
> re-evaluated; I would tend to think that policy shoul
On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dale> On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> The policy is the only standard we have for the distribution; and
> >> standards not followed are sometimes worse than no standards at
> >> a
[regarding the "guidelines" vs. "rule" discussion:]
I wrote:
> It's up to you which guidelines you want to follow--but if you want to
> maintain packages for our distribution, you'll have to follow our
> guidelines!
I really meant `rules' here, instead of `guidelines.' (Note, that English
is my
On Mon, Apr 20, 1998 at 03:57:27PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > By the way, I do not think I am alone in regarding the Policy
> > as a standards document; a quick (informal) poll on IRC showed a
> > wider accord (for what it counts for).
> >
> Folk
Hi,
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> I agree that there there well may be exceptions to the individual
>> directives in the Policy; in which case I think the exceptions
>> (when known) should be noted in the policy. This has the
Hi,
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> The policy is the only standard we have for the distribution; and
>> standards not followed are sometimes worse than no standards at
>> all. (This is one of my pet peeves with miscrosoft).
>>
On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dale> No, because as a guideline it is correct. This has been my point
> Dale> all along. Policy is a guideline, which points to a preferred
> Dale> path of development and proceedures. When t
Hi,
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> No, because as a guideline it is correct. This has been my point
Dale> all along. Policy is a guideline, which points to a preferred
Dale> path of development and proceedures. When those guidelines fail
Dale> to produce the desired res
On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> The policy is the only standard we have for the distribution;
> and standards not followed are sometimes worse than no standards at
> all. (This is one of my pet peeves with miscrosoft).
>
While I could disagree with the other "personal opinions"
Hi,
I do not think (personal opinion, it seems, looking at the
other responses) that the Policy is a ``guideline''; I have always
thought of it as a set of ``rules'' to be followed.
I think the policy document is what makes Debian a well
integrated distribution; packages can de
Hi,
I agreee, policy is not infallible. But rather than flouting
policy, I think a better approach is to have policy fixed; that way
more people can benefit from the ``correct'' methods.
This is similar to any other bug; rather than merely fixing
the bug with a local hack one i
[ Gratuitous Cc to maintainers who already read debian-devel removed;
please respect the Reply-To ]
Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > It'll be maintained by "Igor Grobman and James Troup
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>". I know this is controversial, but
> > > quite frankly, I don'
On 20 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dale> Then you will need to remove libc6, as the loader is not
> Dale> stripped, as dictated by policy. If I strip it, as policy
> Dale> demands, it will not work.
>
> Have you reported
Hi,
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> Then you will need to remove libc6, as the loader is not
Dale> stripped, as dictated by policy. If I strip it, as policy
Dale> demands, it will not work.
Have you reported this as a bug againt the policy manuals
then? Is poli
Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just go get this right: As Policy Manager I have fiat power WRT policy
> decisions. (This was stated by Bruce when I was nomiated and repeated by
> Ian J. on 8 Dec 97--check out debian-private if you have doubts.)
>
> As I wrote to debian-policy a
On Mon, 20 Apr 1998, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> [I reduced the list of recipients.]
>
> On Sun, 19 Apr 1998, Dale Scheetz wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 19 Apr 1998, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> >
> > > It's up to you which guidelines you want to follow--but if you want to
> > > maintain packages for ou
[I reduced the list of recipients.]
On Sun, 19 Apr 1998, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Apr 1998, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> > It's up to you which guidelines you want to follow--but if you want to
> > maintain packages for our distribution, you'll have to follow our
> > guidelines! Our pol
On Sun, 19 Apr 1998, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> It's up to you which guidelines you want to follow--but if you want to
> maintain packages for our distribution, you'll have to follow our
> guidelines! Our policy applies to all packages in the distribution. Any
> package failing current policy in a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 18 Apr 1998, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On 18 Apr 1998, James Troup wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Santiago approached us (pgp-update) about splitting the debian-keyring
> > from doc-debian because a) the keyring tar ball is currently 256Kb
> > (36% of doc-debian
On 18 Apr 1998, James Troup wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Santiago approached us (pgp-update) about splitting the debian-keyring
> from doc-debian because a) the keyring tar ball is currently 256Kb
> (36% of doc-debian's installed size) and growing (it may eventually
> double in size when I get round to addin
Hi,
Santiago approached us (pgp-update) about splitting the debian-keyring
from doc-debian because a) the keyring tar ball is currently 256Kb
(36% of doc-debian's installed size) and growing (it may eventually
double in size when I get round to adding a debian-keyring.gpg) and b)
the keyring is up
29 matches
Mail list logo
