Quoting Daniel Baumann (2021-09-27 17:42:13) > On 9/27/21 01:53, Paul Wise wrote: > > I think the right way to deal with the Uploaders field in any > > situation is to pretend we live in a world where we have a single > > Maintainers field instead of Maintainer+Uploaders. The Uploaders > > field is a historical wart that really should never have been > > invented in the first place. > > ack, however (and to explain our reasing to use > XSBC-Original-Uploaders): > > * given that it is not guaranteed that the right person is in > Maintainers:, but sometimes only have the actual person doing the > job in Uploaders.. > > we concluded to preserve both in all derivative packages to not > "loose the correct information", without needing to "decide" > which one is correct on a per package basis. > > * for those who remember back in the days when Ubuntu popped up for > the first time.. some people were complaining that Ubuntu was > replacing Maintainers and thus "not giving credit" to the > original packagers (hence, afair, the XSBC-Original-Maintainer: > was introduced later on). > > same *could* be said for Uploaders:, thus in our derivative we > preserve Uploaders: as well in order to "not remove credits". Excellent points (and yes, I remember the tension with Ubuntu perceived as "stealing fame" - around 2004-2006 as I recall). Thanks, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature