On Fri, Jan 09, 1998 at 03:16:00PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > This has been discussed several times now and I don't think there is a
> > need to raise the discussion again. Current policy says that it is up
> > to each maintainer which email address he/she prefers as "Maintainer:"
> > address. However, this address has to be unique for all packages of
> > that maintainer to simplify our tools. Unfortunately, not all
> > maintainers comply with this policy by now--that's one of the reasons
> > why we set up this DB.
>
> There are sometimes good reasons for the same human being to use
> different addresses in the Maintainer fields of different packages.
> For example, the Maintainer field for dpkg refers to a mail alias on
> chiark that goes both to me and to Klee Dienes.
>
> Some people might want to be able to prefilter their mail into folders
> for different packages, and so encode the package into the email
> address.
Great example, because:
Debian Policy Manual
--------------------
Ian Jackson <ijackson@gnu.ai.mit.edu>
Christian Schwarz <schwarz@debian.org>
revised: David A. Morris <bweaver@debian.org>
version 2.3.0.1, 21 October 1997
[..]
2.3.2. The maintainer of a package
----------------------------------
Every package must have exactly one maintainer at a time. This person
is responsible that the license of the package's software complies
with the policy of the distribution this package is included in.
The maintainer must be specified in the `Maintainer' control field
with the correct name and a working email address for the Debian
maintainer of the package. If one person maintains several packages
he/she should try to avoid having different forms of their name and
email address in different `Maintainer' fields.
If the maintainer of a package quits from the Debian project the
Debian QA Group takes over the maintainership of the package until
someone else volunteers for that task. These packages are called
*orphaned packages*.
I was about requesting a change lately but didn't find the right
example. Now here it is. I believe that developers have agreed that
it makes sense to maintain packages as a group. Boot-floppies is another
package that seems to be maintaines by a group.
Therefore I'm requesting a policy change. Leave out the first paragraph
and add a sentence about a group of maintainer in the succsessor
Regards
Joey
--
/ Martin Schulze * joey@infodrom.north.de * 26129 Oldenburg /
/ Whenever you meet yourself you're in a time loop /
/ http://home.pages.de/~joey/ or in front of a mirror /
Attachment:
pgpeoT7f4P1iA.pgp
Description: PGP signature