Bug#484511: Urgencies should all be lower case
Luk Claes <luk@debian.org> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Of course, if someone believes Policy is wrong, they can always propose
>> to change it. In this case, though, I think Policy's current position
>> is also the correct technical one to take.
> Good luck with convincing the ones implementing it...
You make it sound like it's an ASN.1 encoder or something. If Joerg says
that he absolutely won't change dak, or the release team absolutely won't
change britney, then we certainly need to talk about that, but I think
it's just dak and britney that are affected, britney is mostly the only
place that it matters, and I'd be surprised if it's a hard code change.
> Why should it be case insensitive?
I think I already covered this, but to restate: because it's been
documented as case-insensitive for at least seven years and probably more
than a decade and because there's a long-standing minority practice of
using it in all caps for an urgency of high (possibly going back to the
packaging manual that documented urgencies in all caps while stating that
case was insignificant).
> It's not case insensitive now and I do not see any technical reason to
> change that. It's not that package names, sections or anything else is
> case insensitive, is it?
Those feel like different cases to me. Package names and sections are
names whose meanings are external to the specification of the relevant
field and represent directories on disk or file names, which are also
case-sensitive. Urgency is a keyword. I think keywords are generally
better treated as case-insensitive. An example that feels similar to me
is control field names.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: