Quoting Jon Marler (jmarler@debian.org):
> No problem. I will be happy to wait.
>
> I didn't see any emails from Justin. Did he perhaps send it to just the list? If the package descriptions need an update, please let me know when you file the bug.
Hmmm, I guess he CC'ed "qmail@packages.debian.org" just as I did. This
is what we usually do for reviews: they're CC'ed to
debian-l10n-english ("our" list) and <package>@packages.debian.org
(which sould reach the maintainer).
> I believe I have removed most of the "illegal" notes. If I need to remove any more, please let me know.
Hmm, well, in debian/qmail.templates, we still have a few notes left,
but I don't really understand when they're used. Grepping for
"qmail/readme" is actually giving nothing on the package source
tree. So, is this note still used? I believe it is not and should then
be dropped from debian/qmail.templates.
However, I have doubts about this because of the special status of
this package (which we discussed quite a lot in the past, if you remember...).
The text of most of them lead to think they're quite obsolete as of
now, as qmail 1.03 is out for more than 10 years now.
So, maybe could we examine if some "cleaning" is needed?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature