Steve Langasek <[email protected]> writes: > The current DEP5 document is awkward to read with an eye towards > implementation. Several field names are common to more than one > paragraph type, yet the definitions of these fields are given as part of > the definition of one paragraph type or the other; and as a result, the > definitions of each paragraph type are very long and easy to get lost > in.
> I propose to refactor the document to add a new top-level "Fields" > section, and to split the definitions of the fields out from the > information about their usage in each paragraph type. Patch is > attached. > Does this look ok? Does anyone think there's a better way to do this? > Have I introduced any errors in the conversion? Yes, please. This looks great. Thank you! -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
