Re: a nitpicky reading of policy
On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 04:20:00PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 03:41:34PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > I read through the policy document today, trying to nitpick and find things
> > > that have changed in current practice. Here's what I found:
> > >
> > > * The policy manual uses the term "section" to refer to main, non-us,
> > > non-free, and contrib. This overloads the term since we typically call
> > > games, libs, docs, etc, sections. Instead, it calls those things
> > > subsections. It also uses the term inconsitently:
> > [...]
> > > I think this deserves to be cleaned up, but I don't really know what to
> > > call main, contrib, and non-free. Distributions, maybe?
> > We'll, since we are adamant that the Debian distribution consists
> > officially only of "main", this might be a bad idea.
> > "Category", maybe?
> Well, that was my point. Main _is_ a distribution, it is the debian
> distribution. So I thought non-free and contrib could be called
> distributions as well, with the understanding that they are the non-free and
> contrib distributions, not the debian distribution.
Hey ! Every distro have its name (slink, potato, woody).
Please use another term.
> But "area" seems fairly neutral, and is the word used by the social contract,
> so I think I prefer that.