>>>>> On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, Alec Warner wrote: > Brief amendment. In the case where the PM cannot parse the expires header; it > should assume the item is not expired and display it (e.g. it should fail > open.)
> Updated patch attached. > + ``Expires:`` > + Date of expiration, in ``yyyy-mm-dd`` format (e.g. 2005-12-18) for This is only an example, but choosing a date from 2005 looks strange. > + compatability with GLEP 45 [#glep-45]_. Translations should use the date > of > + the original news item. An item is expired if the current date in UTC is > + greater than the expiration date of the item. Package manages should not > + display expired items. In the event where the Expires: header not readily > + converted to a date, package managers should assume items are unexpired. I would strike that last sentence. The GLEP already says "tools handling these news items must ignore any unrecognised header" which implicitly covers it. Also, if we would want to specify more explicitly how to deal with invalid header syntax, then there should be a general section or paragraph about that. > + In news item format ``>2.0``, this field is mandatory. I think it should not be mandatory, for the purpose of the tools dealing with news items. So I'd simply say here: "Only in news item format 2.1 or later." > This field did not > + exist in formats ``<=2.0`` and is optional there. Strike this sentence. If we say "only in format 2.1" above, then it is clear that it didn't exist before. In addition, in the paragraphs for the "Display-If-*" headers, the 2.0 need to be updated to something like "2.0 or later" or "2.*". Ulrich
pgpPLwewpjLBp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
