Russ Allbery wrote:
> In response to the other follow-up, I don't think this is the right place
> (or bug) to discuss udeb package behavior or what portions of Policy they
> comply with.
Surely it is relevant to people reading policy that it does not comply with them all (or in other words that they are out of policy scope), no? Advertising udeb as a valid package-type for policy-compliant packages gives the opposite impression.