On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:26:37 +0000, Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On to, 2007-01-25 at 18:34 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> But the dev-ref is optional -- last time I read it, I did not find >> it very useful tome, and I disagreed with a lot of its dictums, and >> so I largely ignore it while building packages; I rely on my sense >> of best practices. The tech ctte does not come down on me like a >> tonne of bricks for not removing the . from my short descriptions. > Nobody cares if you do things differently from what the dev-ref > suggests. Heck, nobody cares if you violate the policy, either, as > long as nothing breaks. (It's just that for the policy, usually > something does break, if you violate it.) > Likewise for a social policy: as long as there are no problems, > nobody cares if you violate it. If the social policy were to say > "don't swear", and you do swear, but everyone understands that you > had a really, really bad day (you lost your job, your spouse wants a > divorce, the tax people want to audit you, your car was stolen, > *and* someone filed an RC bug against your package), and is willing > to ignore your one-time transgression, then enforcing the policy > against swearing just for the sake of enforcing the policy would be > stupid. > (I'm not saying "don't swear" would be a good rule, it's just an > example here.) But this is the problem. It is called selective enforcement -- there are rules on the law books here in the US that make no sense (you can't invite young white males to play billiards or pool in Mobile, Alabama -- old men, women of any age, or young black men are apparently fine). No one cares about such laws -- until the powers that be want to make an example/ harass someone /throw the book at them, and suddenly they have a $2000 fine for getting friends over for a pool game. Selective enforcement can be chilling. Also, your example has the negative implication, no matter how you disclaim it, that the end result of a social policy is gonna make me feel like I am in a disney movie. No fucking way, man. No fucking way. manoj -- 2180, U.S. History question: What 20th Century U.S. President was almost impeached and what office did he later hold? Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]