special HW: expect reasons to not be in universe

There can be options to provide the very same feature to users from
universe, if that is possible it is preferrable. Clarify the statements
to force reporters to think about that as well as reviewers checking
on it.

Signed-off-by: Christian Ehrhardt <[email protected]>

README.md

@@ -299,6 +299,11 @@ RULE:   at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug,
 RULE:   please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual
 RULE:   steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to
 RULE:   assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial).
+RULE:   If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is
+RULE:   impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work
+RULE:   but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable
+RULE:   please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting
+RULE:   binaries) to users from universe.
 RULE:   This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all
 RULE:   options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details
 RULE:   and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30
@@ -330,6 +335,8 @@ TODO-X:     to test or recreate this. We are aware of the extra implications
 TODO-X:     and duties this has for our team (= help SEG and security on
 TODO-X:     servicing this package, but also more effort on any of your own
 TODO-X:     bug triage and fixes).
+TODO-X:     Due to TBD there also is no way to provide this to users from
+TODO-X:     universe.
 
 RULE: - In some cases a solution that is about to be promoted consists of
 RULE:   several very small libraries and one actual application uniting them
@@ -816,10 +823,10 @@ TODO-A8:   - an agreement with another team to be able to test this for Ubuntu
 TODO-B: - This does not need special HW for build or test
 TODO-C: - This does need special HW for thorough testing, but all options to
 TODO-C:   get this covered have been exhausted and based on demonstration of
-TODO-C1:   enough investigation
-TODO-C2:   proof of why there is currently no other option
-TODO-C:   it is accepted as-is as a compromise.
-TODO-C:   The owning team is committed and aware of the implications for ongoing maintenance.
+TODO-C:   enough investigation and proof of why there is currently no other
+TODO-C:   option it is accepted as-is as a compromise.
+TODO-C:   The owning team is committed and aware of the implications for
+TODO-C:   ongoing maintenance.
 TODO: - if a non-trivial test on this level does not make sense (the lib alone
 TODO:   is only doing rather simple things), is the overall solution (app+libs)
 TODO:   extensively covered i.e. via end to end autopkgtest ?