On 3/1/07, Steve Pitchford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This seems a very pragmatic solution to a problem, however given recent posts, it seems to be a solution in search of approval - is there a meta.yml owner / committee / interest group - at least a mailing list?
Well, Ken Williams maintains the spec [1] so I consider him the ultimate "approver" for all practical purposes. I wanted to get community reactions/suggestions/improvement and with any luck, some degree of consensus. Then I was going to send Ken a patch to the blead spec and a summary of the discussion (though he's on all these lists, too, so I assume he's following it.) In response to other questions about "X-foo", I was mirroring the RFC 822 email spec, where the spec promises that "X-" will never conflict with any future extensions to the spec. (No promise is made about these user fields conflicting with each other, of course) The corollary is that "X-" entries shouldn't be flagged as being in violation of a spec, either. (E.g. by CPANTS) I wasn't recommending it, just putting it out there for consideration. I prefer the "hints" approach, as that makes the purpose of the additional information slightly clearer. David [1] http://module-build.sourceforge.net/META-spec-blead.html
