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

Criteria for sponsoring packages (was: RFS: ripit (updated package))

Wen-Yen Chuang <caleb@calno.com> writes:

> I am new at deb packaging. I think Neil's guidelines [1] is good and
> reasonable.
> I am not an DD nor an DM. I have not start my NM process yet.
> I am not an experienced programer. I only know a little C and shell
> programing.
> Neil's guidelines is clear, simple, and helps new maintainers to keep
> their packages good.

I have found Neil's guidelines invaluable ever since I've been
packaging, even though Neil and I have never even discussed the
possibility of him becoming my sponsor.

I'm glad to see them clearly laid out online and, even better, updated
From time to time as his personal sponsoring policies adapt.

> I do know some Debian official packages maintained by some DDs would
> fail to meet Neil's guidelines.

Note that not everything in Neil's guidelines are appropriate to *every*

Rather, it's best to see them as a coherent set of questions to *have
good answers to*, for every package that one prepares. Neil's
guidelines, and other similar checklists by other sponsors, are very
helpful to prompt me to think about my package from a critical
perspective, which is very difficult to achieve in isolation.

 \           “Why, I'd horse-whip you if I had a horse.” —Groucho Marx |
  `\                                                                   |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Attachment: pgp9YCEt_assI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: