On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 01:21:38PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Joel Aelwyn writes:
> > Because policy, unlike RFCs, does not use normative declarations such as
> > SHOULD and MUST...
>
> >From debian-policy:
> 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.
Hmmm. That contradicts what I got told the last time I filed a wishlist bug
asking for the policy to clearly indicate the normative usages. Oh well,
either times change or someone was mistaken.
I *like* normative usages. I just also like them to be obvious.
--
Joel Aelwyn <fenton@debian.org> ,''`.
: :' :
`. `'
`-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature