Re: Bug#457318: ITP: qmail -- a secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer agent
On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 11:07:18AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 04:23:52PM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 02:28:28PM +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> > > qmail is meant as a replacement for the entire sendmail-binmail system
> > > on typical Internet-connected UNIX hosts. See BLURB, BLURB2, BLURB3, and
> > > BLURB4 in /usr/share/doc/qmail/ for more detailed advertisements.
> > [...]
> > This is not a proper ITP. You only mention where to find documentation
> > on system with a supposedly already installed qmail. To file a proper
> > ITP, make sure you've read the policy manual about what to put in the
> Policy doesn't dictate the format of an ITP message though, or even a
> requirement to submit one. This particular ITP doesn't need to explain
> what qmail is (the target audience already knows) and the ITP isn't
> intended to be a review of the final descriptions.
While it's correct that the policy does not say anything about ITPs IMHO
one of the reasons ITPs are usually CCed to debian-devel is the review
short and long description. This review is quite important for the
quality of these descriptions. So the ITP should in IMO include a draft
of the final short and long description.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter.
Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
~ Samuel Beckett ~