On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Lars Dɪᴇᴄᴋᴏᴡ <lars.diec...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Since we have no consensus on a change of semantic, field extension, field > renaming or deprecation in favour of something better, I came up with a doc > patch (attached because Github is down) that merely describes the current > practice in the wild. Some quotations from you that pull into this direction: > > • "who to spam for problems with this module" > • who to contact with questions or bugs (in the event that there is no > bugtracker) > • Author is probably best as "contact point." > • I always feel uneasy to put my name/email address into "author" when all I'm > doing is keeping the module in working condition on CPAN. > > If you read the patch's prose carefully, it sounds kind of vague as I wanted > to avoid MUSTs and SHOULDs. Any comments welcome.
Works for me. It clarifies the current state, which is consistent with the criteria for changes. After all patches are integrated, I'll probably do a couple editing passes. There are other sections using "must" and "should" and such, so I'd like to harmonize. For the moment, this works great. -- David
