Hi Guillem, Quoting Guillem Jover (2018-12-22 18:58:04) > On Sun, 2018-12-02 at 15:48:53 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Quoting Guillem Jover (2018-12-02 15:17:02) > > > On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 05:44:42 -0500, Chris Lamb wrote: > > > > Could you propose a patch that would fix this to your > > > > satisfaction? > > > > I'm having a little difficulty sorting this out in my head now > > > > after applying, reverting, etc. etc. :) > > > > > > If you ask me personally, I think lintian is fine as it is! I'd > > > probably just update the section descriptions to clarify this, and > > > prepare a mass override request for ftp-masters. But I'd like to > > > hear from the reporters and others who complained about the secion > > > change to know whether they have been convinced by the arguments? > > > :) > > > > Since you ask: No, I am not convinced by your arguments. > > Ok, I'm still curious about why? :)
It seems your argument is essentially that a dictionary locale-specific. I firmly believe that the current use of package section "locale" is for "Localization support for big software packages" (as argued earlier) - i.e. the specific use of the word "locale" related tied to "internationalization and localization". I am not convinced that Debian should change to instead have that package section cover a different more loose definition of "locale". Geographical maps and accounting ledger systems and text editors (those optimized not for computer code but for human prose) are all locale-specific, but not specific to the process of localization. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
