Quoting Vivek Dasmohapatra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Mon, 30 Oct 2006, Christian Perrier wrote: > > >Please let me know whether I should continue with the NMU or if you > >will do a regular upload (which needs to be done pretty quickly as the > >freeze might happen any time). > > I have not completed the DD process and am not sure why the debconf > note is a violation of policy, but if you feel it is correct, then proceed: > I can't do uploads myself anyway, as I am not a DD yet.
It is not a violation of the policy. It is more considered as an abuse of the possibilities of debconf. You can look at the debconf-devel(7) man page for a rationale about debconf notes and why they should mostly never be used...:-) Moreover, the note being displayed at low priority will be mostly never displayed (nearly noone uses the low priority for debconf and the default is high). So this goes against the concept that "notes should be used only for very important things that users have to see....) In the case of the dbishell package, I think that an appropriate Suggests: line would be better suited. --
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
