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

Re: Backports service becoming official


On Dienstag, 7. September 2010, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2010-09-07, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> > Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> > time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> > personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages ownership as for
> > normal packages ("normal" backport maintainer = maintainer of the
> > package in unstable).


> I'm not planning to ever provide backports of any of my packages, and
> while others are welcome to do it, I do not in any way want to be
> bothered by their bugs or upload emails or anything.

That's a valid stand.

> So, please keep current way.

That I dont think it is. I think you not wanting t be bothered by backports of 
your packages is quite an exception, so I would propose some additional 
header to BTS mails about backports, so you can setup your filters to ignore 
those mails.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: