On 2024-11-29 11:04:54, Simon Josefsson wrote: > Otto Kekäläinen <o...@debian.org> writes: > > > Thanks Gioele for the stats. I noticed that 90% of the votes came in > > the first two days. > > > > In this system you can unvote and put your thumbs up on another > > proposal if you want to change your mind now after letting the > > question sink in for a few weeks, but please make sure you have voted > > only on one option. Double votes will be manually nullified at final > > count as there is no technical way to prevent it. > > > > I have been pondering about this myself and decided today to cast my > > own vote on DEP0 > > (https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/15) as I have > > seen so much of RFC822, dep3, dep8 and DEP14 in use in many places. > > > > I will count the final status on Dec 17th so that they have been open > > for 30 days, and then follow up with MR to implement the winning > > option. > > Wouldn't another option be to allow for multiple ways to write things, > as long as they are consistently written in the same style for the same > purpose? > > I prefer writing DEP 4711 in text. > > I prefer writing https://example.org/dep4711.txt in URLs. > > I prefer writing [DEP-4711] as a reference keyword.
This summarises my preference perfectly, however, I'm not sure if we can enforce this consistenly. I originally voted for DEP-4711, but after seeing it in text (IMHO ugly), I went and changed my vote for DEP 4711, which is very nice on the eyes. However, that does not work URLs (nicely), and as you say, "DEP 8" is not easily searchable. So I fully agree that URLs and text should have different representations, somewhat agree about keywording, but then we're back at inconsistency, especially if everyone has to learn 3 rules about writing… regards, iustin
