| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 7:26 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> If you want to make it clear, change "should" to "must" and maybe |
| 3 |
> clarify per-package exception and limit to update case if you believe |
| 4 |
> that really *all* *new* eclasses must be send to mailing list. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
As a native English speaker/writer, I find this "should" versus "must" |
| 7 |
argument very tedious. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
If a technical document says I "should" do something, and I don't do |
| 10 |
it, I probably have very good reason for not doing it and should be |
| 11 |
able to easily explain that reason. There's nothing wrong with that, |
| 12 |
and calling it out on a mailing list is entirely appropriate. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
If a technical document says I "must" do something, I take that |
| 15 |
somewhat more seriously, and I expect bad things will happen if I go |
| 16 |
against it. In the case of Gentoo, I would expect a revert with no |
| 17 |
questions asked if the procedure is not followed. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
In either case, it's clear that the advice given in the document is |
| 20 |
something I should pay attention to. |
Archives