Dale Scheetz wrote: >On 7 May 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> Fine. But the moment any package ``ignores'' policy and >> insists policy is not broken, so should not be fixed, I shall file >> bugs against the package. > >Which I will happily reasign to Policy.
Hang on, Dale. Just think about this. A package ignores policy - the only good reason is that policy is inappropriate to this particular package. In that case, the policy is inadequate - file a bug against policy, requesting a better definition. But if the package maintainer says that policy is _not_ broken, the fault must be with the package. You are saying that you would reassign a bug to policy, while at the same time denying that policy is broken? That does not make sense. -- Oliver Elphick [EMAIL PROTECTED] Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1 ======================================== "If it is possible, as much as it depends on you, live peaceably with all men." Romans 12:18 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
