On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.9.1.0 > > Raphael Hertzog wrote[1]: > > > It has been discussed on -release, not on -devel: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2011/02/threads.html#00381 > > > > (I don't think it matters much given that all important stakeholders where > > involved) > > No strong objection from me. I guess that suggests we should change > policy §3.5 at the same time (to permit discussion of Pre-Depends on > debian-release as an alternative to debian-devel, for example)?
I don't think so. The reason the discussion started on debian-release was because the initial solution involved a dependency bump on libc6 (and would affect migrability of packages). Using the Pre-Depends on the multiarch-support package was later identified as an elegant solution to avoid this. That's why it was discussed there. Otherwise it might well be the case that it would have been discussed on -devel. BTW, that section say "should not" and not "must not"... you must allow some flexibility in the interpretation of the sentence. You seem to be very keen of interpreting it as a hard rule. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English) ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français) -- 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/20110330120315.gb2...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
