On Sun, 2006-11-19 at 12:21 +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote: > Neil Williams wrote: > > Why is this double space seen as mandatory? - it is not. Single spacing > > is fine in most cases. > > roumors has it that some automatic tools are in need of having two > leading spaces. This is way too vague, because I have yet to see one (1) concrete tool to be mentioned that actually breaks when not doing this. If you look at common tools like aptitude and packages.debian.org, they work just fine... > look at policy, as long as it is not "fixed" there, it > should be kept as it is (with two leading spaces). Maybe you should be the one looking at policy, because it's not in there :) The devref spends 5 paragraphs on specifying the format of this field, that itself is contained in the description field. Way overengineered, and there's no concrete problems with the simple way. Let's stop with this "extra space" thing that serves no advantage. It you think there is, please provide us with a concrete real-world description + tool that breaks on it. Thijs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part