Re: Intended MBF: maintainer scripts not starting on #!
Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 03:03:09PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> (We unfortunately don't have good language for this in Policy. Right
>> now, the must/should distinction conflates two things: severity, and
>> certainty. We used to have the same problem in Lintian and explicitly
>> split severity and certainty so that we could talk about them
>> independently.
> wow. I'd be hoping that this is fixable in policy too…
Policy is currently written like a normal instruction manual. This has a
lot of real merit, but for quite some time I've thought that it may be
worth the effort to figure out how to structure it in a somewhat more
formal way, so that each requirement is clearly spelled out as a
requirement with both severity and certainty noted. It would eliminate a
lot of ambiguity that comes from trying to draft rules in free-form text.
Of course, then I started running short on time to spend on such grand,
sweeping projects. :(
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: