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

Re: Debian Maintainer conditionals

On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 11:29:45AM +0100, Martin Meredith wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 10:19 +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
> > A sponsor has to do that. No DM is allowed to introduce new binary
> > packages, even if that's just because of a name change. This is what is
> > meant by "package is not NEW".
> It depends on the definition of "package" etc. If I added a new binary
> package, for example, to split off part of a package, then only that new
> package is NEW, however, the package as a whole gets held in the NEW
> queue.

That's right and I like it this way. :)

> I think, at a minimum, I'd like to see the wording changed to something
> that states that it counts for any package that needs to go through NEW
> rather than for wholly new packages

The wiki says that one condition is for the package to be not NEW. Using
upper-case characters reads to me that the NEW queue is meant which is
technically described somewhere else. So, maybe it is not absolutely
clear that there's is a difference between "new" and "NEW" and maybe
this could be explained better but in general it's quite approriate if
you have that in mind, I guess. It is not about the DM wiki page to
describe in what technical circumstances a package is to be delivered to
the NEW queue. Don't you agree?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: