Russ Allbery wrote: > Sorry, please reply to this message rather than the other. I got the > wrong bug number and sent this to Lintian instead of to Policy. > > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> After discussion with Joerg Jaspert, I'm of the opinion that dak is the >> canonical place for valid urgencies to be set. >> Thus, sending this back to lintian, cloning to debian-policy, and >> blocking this one by the new debian-policy bug. >> >> -policy readers: >> urgencies are currently set as lower case only; dak will treat any >> unkown urgency (including upper cased ones) as 'low'. Britney also >> doesn't pay attention to non-lower-case urgencies. >> >> 5.6.17 says urgencies are case-*in*sensitive, and should be changed (IMO >> etc) > > Given that Policy has said that Urgency is case-insensitive since 3.5.5 > (June 2001) when it imported text from the original packaging manual that > said it was case-insensitive, I'm going to need some convincing that this > is really a bug in Policy as opposed to a bug in dak and britney. Even > putting aside the question of who implemented what first, since I expect > both go back for years, we know that uppercase has been used in practice > and this doesn't seem like a useful place to enforce case. > > Wouldn't the easiest solution be to just make dak (and britney) lowercase > the urgency string before working with it?
I thought policy was documenting practice and not the other way around? That should be enough to convince you... Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
