where to maintain DEP8^W autopkgtest spec now
rra at debian.org
Thu Jul 24 16:33:24 UTC 2014
Stefano Zacchiroli <zack at debian.org> writes:
> I totally agree with you, Antonio. And I do *not* mean to imply that
> moving the spec under the debian-policy umbrella equates to *freezing*
> the spec. For me it is just an attempt to have the spec in a place that
> is more tool-neutral, and where we can actually edit stuff (once a DEP
> gets ACCEPTED, it ceases to be such a place).
> But you're right that we should better clarify what would be the editing
> process for sub-policies that get integrated into the debian-policy
> Can someone, maybe with past experience on other sub-policies (e.g. the
> perl one), comment on what are the recommended work-flows for
> maintaining sub-policies under the debian-policy umbrella?
I'm personally fairly unhappy with the degree to which things tend to
stagnate in Policy-land. In the past, adopted sub-policies have used the
same criteria as Policy itself, but I think it would be very interesting
as an experiment to adopt a sub-policy, give the relevant maintainers
direct commit access to the Policy repository, and let them maintain it
however they see fit.
I think it would be good for Debian if, in the long run, all the various
sub-policies were collected together in one place. (I'm thinking here of
the Python policy, the Emacs policy, and so forth.) However, I don't
think they should all use the same editing criteria, and I think that's
been a barrier in achieving this goal. I'd rather see there be dedicated
maintenance teams for the sub-policies that use the criteria that makes
sense for their area of expertise, all of whom have direct Git commit
access to the Policy repository for that purpose.
Russ Allbery (rra at debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the autopkgtest-devel