Bug#881431: proposed wording
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 08:02:48AM -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> writes:
> >
> > Sounds better than mine. I'd re-add "once that package has been accepted
> > into the archive", to make it obvious that resubmissions to NEW and/or
> > mentors are expected to reuse version numbers of what they amend.
>
> Personally, I usually increase version numbers in those situations. It's
> not like we're going to run out of version numbers...
Yeah, that's why my edit doesn't mandate either option. It just would be
wrong to suddenly forbid the one that seems to be far more prevalent
currently -- at least without a discussion.
The policy should be clear wrt what's forbidden vs what's allowed,
merely recommending one particular way belongs to the devref.
Meow!
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ When I visited the US a couple decades ago, Hillary molested and
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ groped me. You don't believe? Well, the burden of proof is on you!
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Flooding a douche with obviously false accusations makes your other
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ words dubious even when they happen to be true.
Reply to: