On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 05:27:04PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Deng Xiyue <manphiz-guest@users.alioth.debian.org> writes:
>
> > According to Debian Policy Manual section 12.5:
> >
> > In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream
> > sources (if any) were obtained. *It should name the original
> > authors of the package and the Debian maintainer(s) who were
> > involved with its creation.*
>
> Recording in the ‘debian/copyright’ the URL where the original source
> was obtained makes sense.
>
> I don't see why ‘debian/copyright’ needs to “name the Debian
> maintainer(s) who were involved with its creation”; surely the best
> location for that is the already-mandatory package maintainer data on
> entries in ‘debian/changelog’.
>
> > The current DEP 5 proposal doesn't provide a standard field dedicated
> > for the information of original Debianizer
>
> (Side point: Can we please drop this awful neologism, and just refer to
> the process of packaging a work as “packaging”?)
>
OK, so I was referring to the original Debian packager, though
"Debianize" was used when machine-readable format proposal was hold
on wiki.debian.org. But this is irrelevant now :)
> > According to section 1.1, [exact copy of Debian Policy §12.5 paragraph
> > 2]
>
> Section 1.1 of what?
>
Bah, my bad. I was trying to refer to the following wording from
section 1.1 of debian-policy:
Non-conformance with guidelines denoted by should (or recommended)
will generally be considered a bug, but will not necessarily render
a package unsuitable for distribution.
and now with:
These classifications are roughly equivalent to the bug severities
serious (for must or required directive violations), [..snip..]
Hence my concern on omitting that information may lead to bug reports.
> > So this is not strictly required, but it is considered a bug, which
> > AIUI needs fixing. Hence I wonder how this was and will be handled.
>
> I think it's a bug in policy; it should not require a redundant record
> of historical information (the maintainers of the original versions of
> the Debian package) already mandated in the ‘debian/changelog’ file.
So I guess this is another vote for removing this requirement from
Debian Policy :)
Regards,
Deng Xiyue
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature