Re: Derived distributions and the Maintainer: field
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Henning Makholm <email@example.com> writes:
> >> You seem to require a standard of attribution in the Maintainer field
> >> that Debian does not itself follow in our default procedures. To wit:
> >> NMUs _within_ Debian keep the Maintainer field unchanged.
> > The difference is that a Debian Maintainer can replace the NMU any
> > time he wants with his own package.
> > I don't have the same ability to replace a non-Debian altered package.
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 10:28:23PM +0000, Martin Meredith wrote:
> The only reason packages are changed in ubuntu is because they don't work
> as expected in ubuntu - whether this be a different "vision" for the
> package's use, or just a problem with it having gone through a different
> transition/having a different toolchain, is a different point. But even so
> - We DO try and use as many things as possible from debian unchanged ;)
ALSO, new upstream versions which weren't otherwise required for
transitions. Example package: xastir.
Please don't top post.
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>