[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#64437: [PROPOSED] Must/Should/May in policy



On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:01:58AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> 
> 	I have been trying to get this mail out all this week, and
>  somehow it never seems to show up on the mailing list. I apologize if
>  this shows in duplicate. 
> 	
>         I have been over the discussion in the list, and here is my
>  encapsulation of the consensus that developed here (I did exercise my
>  judgement in a couple of cases, including toning down the new
>  requirement for all configuration files needing manual pages -- I
>  would support a proposal that that be so, but it should not be a part
>  of this proposal).
> 
>         As Josip asked, this is a word diff wrt the recently uploaded
>  policy package. 
> 
>         Comments appreciated.

(wdiff delted)

By the looks of things this mail isn't getting distributed via the -policy
list because it's too big. It did make it into the BTS though, so you should
be able to get the full message at:

	http://cgi.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=64437&msg=51

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
                 We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
                                      -- Dave Clark

Attachment: pgpr8U5SYke2v.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: