Charles Plessy <ple...@debian.org> writes: > First, minor point, but I think that #196367 (Clarify Policy on priority > inversion in dependencies) can also be closed by the changes.
Thank you! > Second, I would like to propose one more clarification to the > description of the "Important" priority. I believe this is #776557 (and kind of unrelated to this discussion). Maybe move this discussion there? There's already been a fair bit of (rather inconclusive) discussion on that bug. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
