On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:57:51PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > Charles and Ben have offered competing patches for Source, one making it > optional (but relying on the policy to make it implicitly mandatory in > most cases), the other making it required (but allowing just a mention > of upstream sources not existing, when that is the case).
> Is anyone in favor of one or the other? I am not opposed to Charles' patch to make it optional, but I think it's a pointless distinction. There are many requirements within DEP-5 that cannot be enforced by a mere parser, so I don't find that a compelling reason to mark something as 'optional' which we know is actually conditionally required. I am vehemently opposed to Ben's patch, which is effectively an end run around Debian Policy. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
