On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 12:01:05PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> I think the basic problem here is that the policy manual is using
> MUST and SHOULD (actually _must_ and _should_) in a different sense
> than anywhere else. This is hard to adjust to for someone used to
> reading RFCs.
>
> The usage I'm familiar with is that MUST signifies that noncompliance
> is definitely a bug, and SHOULD signifies that noncompliance is a bug
> unless it solves a real problem. With the policy manual's usage,
> there seems to be no way to express that something is definitely a bug,
> but not necessarily a severe one.
Agreed.
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/
