Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <h...@debian.org> writes: > Initial priorities are set by the ftpmaster that accepted the package from > NEW. They may, or may not match the ones in the package's priority field. > > i.e. that field is an _advisory_ field.
This is not what is in the policy. The policy says, that it is set from the according fields. ftp-master is not mentioned at all here. > Archive priorities are at the sole discretion of the ftpmasters. If > anything, debian-policy would be updated to match reality. Why? Is there a specific reason why ftp-master shall freely decide about priority and section? They don't decide about other stuff, so why these two? Usually, if they think that this is wrong, why should they not go through the usual bug reporting asking for a change? At least, this is what I learned for the process if something is wrong with a package. Best regards Ole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/8738cyq51w....@baikal.ole.ath.cx
