Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> writes: > This was intentional when those files were introduced since rebuilding > them requires Emacs, and the concern was that not everyone who worked > on Policy would want to have Emacs installed.
Thanks for the explanation. I think that Emacs should simply be a build dependency, as Docbook is. Why would “I don't want Emacs installed” be any more valid than “I don't want Docbook installed”? The desire to not *use* Emacs is a valid one; but one does not need Emacs to edit the README.org source. > If that's no longer a concern, I can remove the generated files and > build them from debian/rules by default. (And add ‘emacs’ to ‘Build-Depends-Indep’, I assume.) I don't know for whom it was a concern. How will we know if those concerns are now addressed? > In the long run, if we're standardizing on Docbook, they should also > be converted to Docbook. Sure, at which point Emacs would no longer be a build dependency. -- \ “I wish there was a knob on the TV to turn up the intelligence. | `\ There's a knob called ‘brightness’ but it doesn't work.” | _o__) —Eugene P. Gallagher | Ben Finney <b...@benfinney.id.au> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877hjbisq1....@benfinney.id.au
