From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85AE1387FD for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:47:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D81B2E0B0F; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:47:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA2C2E09F0 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:47:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B07DD33FE1B for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:47:17 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.46 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.890, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.568, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JquXJD0vyGg2 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:47:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3E4833FD2C for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:47:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WViv5-0003UG-3N for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:47:07 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:47:07 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:47:07 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: News item draft for >=sys-fs/udev-209 upgrade Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:46:56 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <530AD951.9020109@gentoo.org> <533C6FE0.4060806@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.140 (Chocolate Salty Balls; GIT 2ae6aff /usr/src/portage/src/egit-src/pan2) X-Archives-Salt: 74c32617-09a9-42ce-8387-19f8b64c12fb X-Archives-Hash: 142918b222bff80577738e761282cba1 Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina posted on Wed, 02 Apr 2014 16:15:28 -0400 as excerpted: > On 02/24/2014 12:32 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: >> If it's okay, I'd want to post this fast, before adding KEYWORDS to >> sys-fs/udev-209's ebuild >> >> > Should means required now? Man if I only knew that last week... In practice, I believe "should", in both the strict RFC sense and as normally used, normally means: "Not literally /required/, but if you don't, chances are pretty good you'll come to regret it at some point, and if perchance you don't, someone else almost certainly will." ... Which would seem to fit the current situation rather well. Regardless of whether the original actors yet regret it (I imagine they do but I'm not them), I'm absolutely positive there's at least one other person (me) that does, and I'd guess much of the list would add themselves to that list as well. What big ruckus might we have never known might have been, were only one particular "should" followed at the appropriate point... -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman