Re: #1416 Injection-Date: proposed diff

[Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Forrest J. Cavalier III" <mibsoft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I think it should be reworded to avoid the clumsiness.

> In the first it reads "SHOULD" be offering the same proto article.
> The second sentence says "proto-article as offered MUST be identical."

> So which is it?  SHOULD or MUST?

It's talking about two different things.  The structure of the section
goes like:  You SHOULD use simultaneous injection of the same article
rather than transforming an already-injected article back to a
proto-article and injecting it again.  If you do use simultaneous
injection, here's how you MUST do it.  If you instead do the latter,
here's how you MUST do it.

Alternative wording suggestions welcome.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>