Re: SVG icons

[Bill Allombert <allomber@math.u-bordeaux.fr>]

On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 11:55:41AM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 11:49:49PM +0100, Bill Allombert <allomber@math.u-bordeaux.fr> wrote:
> > The authoritative document is the menu _manual_:
> > (/usr/share/doc/menu/menu.txt.gz), section 3.7
> > 
> > An extract from that section:
> > 
> >      Debian package maintainers should ensure that any icons they include
> >      for use in the Debian menus conform to the following points:
> > 
> >      1.   The icons should be in xpm format.
> > 
> >      2.   The icons may not be larger than 32x32 pixels, although smaller
> >           sizes are ok.
> 
> Note that's a "may" and a "should", not a "must". IIRC they only trigger
> lintian warnings, not errors.

Should I *really* upload a new menu manual with s/should/must ?

Debian policy convention are that violating a should is a normal bug,
violating a must is a serious bug:

     In the normative part of this manual, the words _must_, _should_ and
     _may_, and the adjectives _required_, _recommended_ and _optional_,
     are used to distinguish the significance of the various guidelines in
     this policy document.  Packages that do not conform to the guidelines
     denoted by _must_ (or _required_) will generally not be considered
     acceptable for the Debian distribution.  Non-conformance with
     guidelines denoted by _should_ (or _recommended_) will generally be
     considered a bug, but will not necessarily render a package unsuitable
     for distribution.  Guidelines denoted by _may_ (or _optional_) are
     truly optional and adherence is left to the maintainer's discretion.

     These classifications are roughly equivalent to the bug severities
     _serious_ (for _must_ or _required_ directive violations), _minor_,
     _normal_ or _important_ (for _should_ or _recommended_ directive
     violations) and _wishlist_ (for _optional_ items).  [2]

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here.