On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:01:40PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 11:01:53PM +0000, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I just checked: in policy 3.1.1.1, they were a MUST (section 2.4.2).
> > I don't know when that got lost. So we'll go back to it.
>
> Must/Should/May only had given meanings in 3.2.1.0, so it was an accepted
> amendment to change that must to a may.
>
> I object, once again.
[So I guess that we stick with debian/rules MUST be makefiles as
well!]
How about this:
Source dependencies are a requirement. There is no reason I can think
of for a maintainer to say "My package doesn't need to specify source
dependencies, I am an exception to the rule."
What *is* reasonable is to say "I don't yet have time to deal with
this."
So the source dependencies are a MUST, but we don't yet file RC bugs,
probably not even normal bugs against missing source dependencies.
We need an annex to policy specifying that certain new requirements
are not yet considered RC, and these are they: ....
I think that this will resolve the issue. I'm going to post this idea
separately.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
