Bug#102213: PROPOSAL] Policy interpretation and exceptions
>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Anthony> + In rare cases a package may be enough of a special case that
Anthony> + it should not follow a guideline and the exception would just
Anthony> + be confusing if listed in this manual itself.
Is this likely to be the case? I would think that if there are
well known exceptions to policy directives, there should be a
informative footnote in policy mentioning the _type_ of problem that
leads to the exception, (and not mentioning the package by name,
perhaps). Since these cases ought to be quite rare, I shouldn't think
that these footnotes shall clutter up policy to the extent that
policy is confusing.
Or do you think we need to have an escape clause from policy
compliance, allowing developers to ignore policy with a note in
QOTD: "It was so cold last winter that I saw a lawyer with his hands
in his own pockets."
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C