On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 05:23:40PM +0200, Birger Schacht wrote: > Robie, could you please point out the part of the Debian policy that > this package is violating?
I cannot. I believe that this issue is such a clear violation of
Debian's philosophy that it has never been necessary to document it
formally as policy.
However you seem to have missed out the latter part of the definition of
"serious" in your quote. Here's the full definition:
serious is a severe violation of Debian policy (roughly, it
violates a "must" or "required" directive), or, in the package
maintainer's or release manager's opinion, makes the package
unsuitable for release.
I think it's quite clear that this issue makes the package unsuitable
for release. If the package maintainer disagrees and thinks that it's OK
to release Debian with this bug outstanding, they may change it.
Are you suggesting that "serious" is not justified? Nobody seems to have
doubted that so far. If the package maintainer wants to reduce the
severity of this bug by relying on policy not mentioning this type of
matter, then I'm fairly confident that this will result in policy being
amended in the end anyway.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
