On Thursday, 12 January 2012 22:25:51 Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Hi Florian, > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Florian Hubold <doktor5...@arcor.de> wrote: > > Am 12.01.2012 19:01, schrieb Christian Lohmaier: > >>> [..] > > > > PS: Maybe next time you could improve on your wording, the policy may > > currently be incorrect, not reflecting good packaging practices, but as > > it's only a policy written by humans, it's not dumb. Just a hint. ;) > > No, I disagree. The policy as written is dumb in my opinion.
I wouldn't say it is dumb, I would say it is conservative. Can you off-hand provide a list of which of our ~10 000 packages have a 'maintained bugfix only branch with regular releases' policy? I would expect it is less than 5%. Granted, this may include a number of large/important packages. But, I can also post some counter-examples: -samba (but, it may be useful to have some not-strictly-bugfix changes, as some are 'compatability with the new SP of some other popular OS') -openldap > If you publish a policy, and the policy is incorrect, the whole > process of using policies is worthless. So I /have/ to assume that the > policy reflects the decisions/conclusions from the discussions by > people running the project. I think some of the existing policies may have been done in haste. IMHO, there should be a policy on policies, covering how they are agreed upon, how amendments are agreed up etc. > To me it stays a silly/stupid policy. Please provide a proposal for changes to the policy. Regards, Buchan