Re: package ownership in Debian
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:30:34 +0300, George Danchev <danchev@spnet.net> said:
> IMHO the maintainer(s) could mention their wishes wrt to NMU and any
> particular package in debian/copyright, right after This package was
> debianized by ... When needed NMU is appreciated/forbidden/whatever
I agree that it could be helpful to document a maintainer's preference
somewhere, but I'm not sure that debian/copyright is the right place.
Maybe in the PTS, or getting it to show up in some extended view of the
BTS, or in db.debian.org (although that won't help non-DDs).
I like the LowThresholdNMU idea, but I won't be signing on for that
because my own preferences are a bit stricter than what's on that page.
It would be nice to document somewhere that I don't mind (well-made)
NMUs, but please contact me first -- give me about a week to respond,
and if I don't respond by then (and I haven't announced that I'm on
vacation), then you can assume that I'm MIA, and NMU to your heart's
content.
Another question is: right now, LowThresholdNMU is opt-in: add your name
to the list if you don't mind NMUs. I wonder how people would feel
about changing it so that the default is low-threshold -- for those who
don't say anything, we assume by default that NMUs are OK, and if you
don't want people to touch your packages, or have other preferences,
then you publish that in some generally-known area, wherever we choose
to publish that information.
(Of course, I think that you should always be allowed to NMU by
following the procedures that we already have.)
> That will help to avoid some confusion, when people are in doubt wrt
> "to NMU or not to NMU".
--
Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: hubert@uhoreg.ca - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA (Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
Reply to: