* Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-03-15 20:42]: > IMHO the templates can be regarded as an inofficial standard; tests > should not be weaker than them;
Oh, they can be slightly weaker. Joerg's templates are good starting point; it shouldn't be *much* less than that, but I have no problems when the ELF questions are removed (I do that myself). > however, I don't think that a little freedom on the AM's side hurts. Yes, Joerg's templates are basically an orientation, but you can certainly deviate from them. > > E.g. Martin Michlmayr said that he won't put my additional tasks > (package correction, RC bug fixing, writing actual manpage for a > program that does not already have one, and applicant-specific ones) > into the official templates; however, he appreciates them. I like them, and wish all AMs would ask their applicants to fix RC bugs because that's a practical test and actually helps Debian. But I felt they don't fit in well with the quite rigid templates... most AMs just use the template as it is, and I don't feel comfortable asking applicants to fix RC bugs just in a template... it should be done on a case per case basis. (Don't know if this was clear at all now...) -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
