Quoting Manoj Srivastava (srivasta@debian.org): > Right. These are staid, old, boring, unchanging fields; and > maintainers need not expect these to change; and putting them in policy > means that even dpkg can't change the fields drastically fro under the > developers. > > However, policy is not exhaustive; and if policy says nothing on > a topic, it means the topic is permitted, not prohibited; so the > Homepage: field can be used by any package without the package falling > foul of policy. OK. I am not very strongly pushing the idea of documenting first in the policy. This was just about exploring the various possibilities. I keep you comment about the proposed changes to the policy being roughly OK. I added them to the wiki page but kept those policy changes coming after other changes such as APT frontends implementation, devref update, dh-make and lintian/linda stuff. > So, while I will not prevent you from going the route you > proposed, if you feel it is the right thing to do, I would still advice > caution. Having said that, I am not sure what changes might be needed > for home page fields (is there a concept like ultiple homepages?), but It seems that very few packages currently use multiple URLs in the pseudo-field in the package's description. So we could maybe allow that field to be multi-valued...
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature