Le Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 02:30:40AM +0200, gregor herrmann a écrit : > On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:05:23 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > That also lets the rule with License be consistent with the rule for other > > fields, by requiring two leading spaces for any literal text. It also > > means that we would be using essentially the same formatting conventions > > as Description (Policy 5.6.13). > > I agree, saying "same formatting as in Description in debian/control" > makes it easier than having to remember different syntaxes.
I am a little bit worried that it may be unwelcomed to have to take extra care of indentation when using DEP-5. Nevertheless, if we go that way, I think that we need to make the explanation about the format more precise, since it may be ambiguous if the above means that the Comment and Disclaimer fields will have a single line synopsis or not. So I would proposer either ‘same syntax as the Description field of Debian control files’ if they will have a synopsis or ‘same formatting as the long description of the Description field in Debian control files’ if only the Files field will contain a syopsis. I have another comment on details of the DEP's syntax, about the order of paragraphs. Policy's §5.1 does not specify that the order or paragraphs is important, while this is a crucial information in DEP-5. If this is not an omission in §5.1, I recommend that this additional requirement is mentionned in the DEP. Have a nice week-end, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
