Hi, On Dienstag, 7. September 2010, Sune Vuorela wrote: > On 2010-09-07, Lucas Nussbaum <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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). +1 > 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. cheers, Holger
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.