Re: DEP-5: general file syntax
On pe, 2010-08-20 at 17:05 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think a better approach would be to, once the document has settled down,
> publish it with a version number and give that version of the document a
> permanent URL. So, for instance, we would publish DEP-5 1.0 and give it a
> URL something like http://dep.debian.net/DEP-5/1.0 at which it would
> always be found. If we publish a new version of the document, the new
> version would be put at http://dep.debian.net/DEP-5/1.1, but the old
> version wouldn't be changed.
DEPs are not supposed to change after they're approved, so it should be
a new DEP rather than DEP-5/1.1, but that's a trivial detail.
How would that tie in with updating it via the normal policy process? I
thought we'd keep the file in the debian-policy package for future
updates.
> Note that you should say that explicitly, since in the control file format
> not every field is multi-line (the default is that a field may not be
> multi-line).
ACK.
> I think we could merge all three of these into the same case by using the
> Description syntax, with the note that blank lines don't really make sense
> in some fields. (So, I guess, merge them into two cases.)
I'm OK with saying that multiline fields should use the Description
markup, especially noting Charles's point about only using the long
description part, when appropriate. This simplifies things quite a lot.
I'll word a concrete patch to propose.
Reply to: