Re: [DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field.

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Charles Plessy writes ("[DEP 8] About the Restrictions and Features field."):
> reading DEP 8's appendix, I wonder about the necessity to keep separate
> Restrictions and Features fields.  For instance, the no-build-needed Feature
> could also be a needs-build restriction.  Perhaps the specification can
> be simplified by dropping the Features field ?

The distinction is essential.  When the spec is extended, we need to
be able to specify either (a) old test runners should know that they
don't understand the package and refuse to test it (b) old test
runners should ignore the new features.

ian.