On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 08:18:18PM +0100, Wouter van Heyst wrote: > On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 08:01:13PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > Respectively from Latin Extended-B and Latin Extended-A. As I said, > > there is no official policy on it, to the letter of the policy any > > non-ASCII is currently forbidden. > > The only clear statement I see is on debian/changelog. I'd think > copyright would also be ok (as Pierre mentioned, for spelling your own > name right), even if it is not policy yet (assuming it's not outright > banned). For executable files, I'm not so sure. > > > Note that there are bugs on policy from 2001 onwards for this issue, > > #99933 for example. I have good faith something like this will be > > accepted into policy post-sarge. > > As do I.
I generally use UTF-8 on copyright, changelog, and control (yes, I do
realize this violates the most formal statements in current policy, but I
also dispute the reasoning - such as it is - behind those statements, and,
as people have said many times, change common practice and then update
policy to match).
Reasons?
Changelog: Mostly for proper names, rarely ends up mattering in my
changelogs, in practice.
Control: Actually, this rarely ends up truly being UTF-8 right now, as
I use the 'common English' spelling of my chosen surname (the proper
traditional spelling of it uses the à letter/ligature: Ãlwyn).
Copyright: Pretty much always, for the simple reasy that I use the proper
copyright symbol in the copyright declaration for the Debian Packaging
stuff (I don't muck about with upstream's copyright declaration, except to
iconv it if it uses a non-UTF-8 character set, which has never happened to
date).
--
Joel Aelwyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ,''`.
: :' :
`. `'
`-
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
