On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 22:49, Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> wrote: > > Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> writes: > > > That essentially means it's fine to use diversions and ship releases > > using them, so that's exactly what will happen as per Murphy's law. > > I think we're reaching a consensus that "must" is appropriate for the > systemd configuration files, so this discussion is about how to phrase the > general guidance that isn't specific to systemd. > > I'm therefore not really understanding the argument that you're trying to > make here. Are you trying to say that we should just delete everything in > Policy that isn't a "must" because it serves no useful purpose? If not, > then why are you taking this incredibly aggressive position that general > guidance is pointless unless it says "must"?
Waait, maybe I misunderstood - I thought the change was requested for all additions, including systemd files? Is that not the case? (It would be obvious what it refers to on a merge request :-P ) If I can keep a 'must' for systemd config files, then I'm ok with changing. Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
