>>>>> "Sean" == Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> writes:
Sean> Hello, Sean> On Wed 26 Apr 2023 at 04:48PM -06, Sam Hartman wrote: >> I guess that's consistent with RFC 2119. And RFC 2119 SHOULD >> means that the requirement is RECOMMENDED, and an implementation >> that does not follow the SHOULD needs to have a reason for not >> following the recommendation. Sean> Just to note that Debian Policy's definition of these terms is Sean> not quite the same as the RFC process definitions (I know you Sean> know this -- just wanted to note that they're not the most Sean> relevant definitions). Agreed. I rated the chance that Simon knew the difference between RFC 2119 and policy language and spoke with precision at about 80%. But to reinforce that I picked a flamboyant usage of RFC 2119 in a manner that did not fit policy to make sure that it fit Simon's usage, and for Simon to realize the difference and say "hey no I meant policy language," if on reading my text he realized RFC 2119was not what he meant. Responding to a developer with somewhat less experience I would have just asked whether they really meant to be using policy language.