[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sponsorship: news and questions about the maintainer field

On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Josip Rodin wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 27, 1999 at 01:31:59PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > But I wonder what I can put in the Maintainer field ... would it be a
> > problem to leave the name of the real maintainer that is not yet a Debian
> > developer ? I don't like it too much ... that's why I suggested to use
> > Debian QA Group <debian-qa@lists.debian.org>. That does make sense for
> > oprhaned packages that are adopted but does not make any sense for new
> > packages ... any idea ?
> AFAIK dpkg-buildpackage and dinstall don't look at the Maintainer: field,
> they authenticate just the one who uploads (the changelog entry). BTS does
> look at that entry, but that is fine with us (the bug reports should go
> to the prospective maintainer, not the one who uploaded).
> But, the Maintainers file is problematic. Can it contain entries that
> aren't in the keyring?

What about putting the sponsor's email in the Maintainer field, so
when the maintainer's application is accepted, he can promptly take
over the package communicating only with the sponsor, who - I think -
has much less CPU load than the Debian QA group :)


ps: a little correction: Alexander Koch is already a maintainer, and
thus I asked him to sponsor my zebra packages that he agreed to do.

..all in all it's just another rule in the firewall. 

                                         /Ping Flood/

Reply to: