-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Russ Allbery wrote: > David Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >>As a non-DD I'd say that that is not a question of policy, but of >>quality of implementation: There are tools which rely on the section of >>a package to reason about them (deborphan for example). > > >>So unless you have a good reason for putting that package into sound, >>why not just do the thing everyone else does too? > > > It would be very nice to document those "things everyone else does." My > experience when first starting to package things is that many of those > conventions aren't documented anywhere and there are occasional packages > in the archive that get it wrong so you can get unlucky in the examples > you choose to look at. > > I'm not sure if policy is the right place to put that documentation, > although I don't think it's a bad place. Certainly for the stuff that the > ftpmasters override, it seems like in practice it's a requirement and if > it were documented in policy, more people would get it right in advance. > Alternately, maybe it's something to go into that archive tools > documentation that's been discussed from time to time (along with such > things as the definition of Uploaders). > > If there is some good documentation of archive sections that I've > overlooked, please do let me know.
Are there lintian/linda checks for these things? Cheers Luk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCbpeB5UTeB5t8Mo0RAnEUAJ4iQ34+QV0oC59N+tvKcOF77jAJ3gCfe0pd tKcfRhyO4UisRI6Ttz1uq7Y= =yT4F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
