# Tracking in-progress policies?
**URL:** https://discourse.cmake.org/t/tracking-in-progress-policies/1062
**Category:** Development
**Created:** [April 20, 2020, 12:44pm UTC](https://discourse.cmake.org/t/tracking-in-progress-policies/1062 "2020-04-20T12:44:19Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@ben.boeckel](https://discourse.cmake.org/u/ben.boeckel)
#### Post date: [April 20, 2020, 12:44pm UTC](https://discourse.cmake.org/t/tracking-in-progress-policies/1062/1 "2020-04-20T12:44:20Z")
One place we have serious conflicts in CMake development is concurrent policy development. Should we keep track of these in a post here so that new policies know what number to take? Rebasing out a policy rename is not the most fun as content and filepaths usually need changed in the process (and the conflicts between CMPA and CMPB doc/test files are conceptually trivial, but mistakes are easy to make).
Basically a post with a list like this:
- CMP0999 - Small description
which gets edited as policies get under development. Requests for new ones can happen via comments on the post or gathered from open MRs.
Thoughts?
Cc: @craig.scott @brad.king @kyle.edwards
---
### Author:  [@brad.king](https://discourse.cmake.org/u/brad.king)
#### Post date: [April 21, 2020, 10:28am UTC](https://discourse.cmake.org/t/tracking-in-progress-policies/1062/2 "2020-04-21T10:28:07Z")
We have had an unusual surge in policies recently, but this has not generally been a problem.
> Rebasing out a policy rename is not the most fun as content and filepaths usually need changed
I have done that by using `git format-patch` to get patch files for the topic, editing the policy number in the patch files with `sed`, and then re-applying them.