On Mon, Feb 26 2018, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:

> This needs to be reworded.  "the +really convention" is probably not
> really policy material (feels more like devref's) and therfore probably
> not mentioned here.

I disagree.  Policy often describes conventions; in particular,
conventions that exist in response to things that are forbidden or
required by Policy.

Moreover, we want someone reading about epochs to be hinted towards the
+really convention, without hoping that they just happen to head over to
devref right after.

> And with this the mention of d-devel happened twice in your patch.

This is Ian responding to the fact that epochs are discussed in two

I would rather fix that in a separate bug.

Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to