On 03/06/08 at 10:47 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > tags 454216 + patch > thanks > > Heya, > > Raphael Geissert <atomo64@gmail.com> wrote: > > * Section 5.9.2: Removing packages > > > > This section should describe how removal requests should be titled as > > stated in some pages[1][2][3]. > > Also, it should mention how to request the removal of an orphaned > > package[3], i.e. reassigning the O: bug to ftp.debian.org and > > retitling instead of sending a new report. > > To fix this, I would propose applying the following diff: > > Index: pkgs.dbk > =================================================================== > --- pkgs.dbk (revision 5203) > +++ pkgs.dbk (working copy) > @@ -1222,14 +1222,44 @@ > If for some reason you want to completely remove a package (say, if it is an > old compatibility library which is no longer required), you need to file a bug > against <literal>ftp.debian.org</literal> asking that the package be removed; > -as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. Make sure you > -indicate which distribution the package should be removed from. Normally, you > -can only have packages removed from <literal>unstable</literal> and > -<literal>experimental</literal>. Packages are not removed from > +as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. > +The bug title should be in the form <literal>RM: <replaceable>package > +</replaceable> <replaceable>[architecture list]/<replaceable> -- > +<replaceable>reason</replaceable>, where <replaceable>package</replaceable> > +is the package to be removed and <replaceable>reason</replaceable> is a > +short summary of the reason for the removal request. > +<replaceable>[architecture list]</replaceable> is optional and only needed > +if the removal request only applies to some architectures, not all. > +</para> > + > +<para> > +To keep the bug title short, you can use one (or more) of the > +following acronyms to indicate standard reasons for removal: > +<itemizedlist> > +<listitem><literal>ROM</literal>: Request of maintainer</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>RoQA</literal>: Request of the QA team</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>ROP</literal>: Request of porter</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>ROSRM</literal>: Request of stable release > +manager</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>NBS</literal>: Not build [by any] source > +[package]</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>NPOASR</literal>: Never part of a stable > +release</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>NVIU</literal>: Newer version in unstable</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>ANAIS</literal>: Architecture not allowed in > +source</listitem> > +<listitem><literal>ICE</literal>: Internal Compiler Error</listitem> > +</itemizedlist> > +</para> > + > +<para> > +Note that removals can only be done for the <literal>unstable > +</literal>, <literal>experimental</literal> and <literal>stable > +</literal> distribution. Packages are not removed from > <literal>testing</literal> directly. Rather, they will be removed > automatically after the package has been removed from > -<literal>unstable</literal> and no package in <literal>testing</literal> > -depends on it. > +<literal>unstable</literal> and no package in <literal>testing > +</literal> depends on it. > </para> > <para> > There is one exception when an explicit removal request is not necessary: If a > @@ -1249,7 +1279,12 @@ > <para> > Usually you only ask for the removal of a package maintained by yourself. If > you want to remove another package, you have to get the approval of its > -maintainer. > +maintainer. Should the package be orphaned and thus have no maintainer, > +you should first discuss the removal request on &email-debian-qa;. If > +there is a consensus that the package should be removed, you should > +reassign and retitle the <literal>O:</literal> bug filed against the > +<literal>wnpp</literal> package instead of filing a new bug as > +removal request. > </para> > <para> > Further information relating to these and other package removal related topics > > For what it's worth, I'm not really sure that the dev-ref should include > the acronym list. Another option would be to link to the removal pages > of the ftp-team. Agreed. Maybe just include ROM, and add a link for the other acronyms? -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature