Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I don't know if it's worth being more formal here in Policy or not.
>> It might be more of a devref thing.
>
> I'm less interested in strictness in Policy than I am in finding out
> how this is *specified* for all consumers, rather than merely
> *implemented* in specific programs.
>
> Life is too short to go chasing down the difference between "that's
> the way it's specified so all consumers of the format can expect it",
> versus "that's the way it's implemented and who knows whether other
> implementations might be just as acceptable".
>
> If the answer is "there is no specification", than what on earth
> should a programmer looking to consume this format actually expect to
> consume?
Any consumer must accept anything with two leading spaces.
Expecting anything beyond that is not garantied to work. But a pretty
good bet is that it will follow the single or multi maintainer format
prodused by e.g. dch.
If you want to write your own tool to interpret a changelog entry then
you should try to share code with existing tools. There is no point in
inventing any new parser. That only leads to differences.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
