>>>>> On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, Alec Warner wrote:

> Brief amendment. In the case where the PM cannot parse the expires header; it
> should assume the item is not expired and display it (e.g. it should fail
> open.)

> Updated patch attached.

> +  ``Expires:``
> +    Date of expiration, in ``yyyy-mm-dd`` format (e.g. 2005-12-18) for

This is only an example, but choosing a date from 2005 looks strange.

> +    compatability with GLEP 45 [#glep-45]_. Translations should use the date 
> of
> +    the original news item. An item is expired if the current date in UTC is
> +    greater than the expiration date of the item. Package manages should not
> +    display expired items. In the event where the Expires: header not readily
> +    converted to a date, package managers should assume items are unexpired.

I would strike that last sentence. The GLEP already says "tools
handling these news items must ignore any unrecognised header" which
implicitly covers it.

Also, if we would want to specify more explicitly how to deal with
invalid header syntax, then there should be a general section or
paragraph about that.

> +    In news item format ``>2.0``, this field is mandatory.

I think it should not be mandatory, for the purpose of the tools
dealing with news items. So I'd simply say here: "Only in news item
format 2.1 or later."

>                                                             This field did not
> +    exist in formats ``<=2.0`` and is optional there.

Strike this sentence. If we say "only in format 2.1" above, then it is
clear that it didn't exist before.

In addition, in the paragraphs for the "Display-If-*" headers, the 2.0
need to be updated to something like "2.0 or later" or "2.*".


Attachment: pgpPLwewpjLBp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to