Bug#196367: debian-policy: clarify what to do about priority mismatches
tags 196367 - patch
thanks
patch means that you're actively asking for seconds, which it sounds from
what you write below that you're not yet.
Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au> writes:
> package debian-policy
> user debian-policy@packages.debian.org
> usertags 196367 + discussion
> tags 196367 + patch
> thanks
Due to a bug in how I have the user categories set up, right now
discussion overrides patch (when it should probably be the other way
around). I try to make sure that only one of the state tags is applied to
a bug at any given time, just to make sure that there isn't any confusion.
> Meanwhile, here is my take on a patch to address this bug. It makes
> assumptions about some of the answers to the open questions, so it is
> likely wrong or incomplete.
This seems fine to me, although it would be nice to get an ftpmaster
response to your query before applying it. It may be that they want all
priority changes vetted by the maintainer first. I'm not sure.
> === modified file 'policy.sgml'
> --- policy.sgml 2010-08-18 20:55:34 +0000
> +++ policy.sgml 2010-08-28 00:43:43 +0000
> @@ -783,9 +783,16 @@
>
> <p>
> Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority
> - values (excluding build-time dependencies). In order to
> + values (excluding build-time dependencies). In order to
> ensure this, the priorities of one or more packages may need
> - to be adjusted.
> + to be adjusted.<footnote>
> + The Priority field of an existing Debian package does not
> + determine the priority of that package;
> + see <ref id="f-Priority">. For this reason, the package
> + maintainer cannot fix this directly, and it is not
> + recommended to file bugs against packages whose source
> + declares an incorrect Priority field.
> + </footnote>
> </p>
> </sect>
>
> @@ -2842,6 +2849,13 @@
> It also gives the default for the same field in the binary
> packages.
> </p>
> +
> + <p>
> + Once a package is in Debian, this field no longer
> + determines the priority of the package in the archive.
> + Instead, the Debian ftpmaster team maintains priority
> + values in the “override file”.
> + </p>
> </sect1>
>
> <sect1 id="f-Package">
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: