Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I agree with you that this is a good idea, it is not current > practice (at least I haven't seen any summaries in any newer packages, > just the old ones). Policy says that the copyright file _must_ contain > that summary, meaning that a considerable amount of Debian packages > is not Policy compliant in that regard. Which means that someone > oughta go and find all those uncompliant packages and file bug reports > against them. > > My proposal may not be something that's The Right Thing(TM) to do, but > it's at least practical. ...
I have never said that I'm opposed to this proposal. All I have done is to clarify a few things and comment on some historical reasons behind the current state of affairs. I agree that the number of packages not complying to this part of Debian policy is a problem, and I concede that it is far easier to change our policy than to fix all of the broken packages. - Brian
