Bug#533287: debian-policy: please clarify 10.7.4
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Sune Vuorela wrote:
so it seems that the "alternative" interpretation, is that "if there
is a interface, then it must be used", but all that is wrapped in a
"should", which is not as binding as a "must".
While this section of policy could probably be clarified, violating a
should directive of policy is almost always a bug. It may be a bug in
the package, another package, or in policy itself. Still, somewhere in
the train, something is suboptimal and should be fixed.
I agree and section 1.1 is clear about this:
"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."
"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). "
Thus violating a "should" could be a bug with important priority.