On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 08:28:30PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:09:26PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 07:53:12PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > No. You're simply interpreting things incorrectly. > > > > > *sigh* You miss the point. I'm perfectly willing to be interpreting it > > incorrectly. The problem is that the wording allows me to interpret in > > incorrectly. I have gone through the policy and quoted you the sections > > that I'm reading to support my interpretation. > > If you interpret "The ABI" as "Any property of the binary that another > package could conceivably depend on" then your position makes sense. But > since nobody would interpret it that way, the obvious conclusion is that > "The ABI" means "The supported ABI". Attempting to codify this more > precisely would just encourage language lawyering, which is exactly what > we were trying to avoid when we generated this policy. Use common sense. > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-November/159819.html -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpf70px2qQgD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
