Re: Is the dependency rule distribution-wise?
Wichert Akkerman <wakkerma@cs.leidenuniv.nl> writes:
> Previously Guy Maor wrote:
> > I'm not sure that is such a good idea. That's the way it was done
> > initially.
>
> The fact remains that currently noone seems to reading
> override-change@debian.org at the moment: I have gotten complaints
> that people mailed that multiple times (mostly to change the
> maintainer of a package), so it is currently very hard to change
> overrides.
Bah. The same people who read ftpmaster@debian.org and
maor-installer@debian.org read override-change. I don't think there's
that much of a problem, and I see all the overrides we _do_ change
that you _don't_ get complaints about. If we've missed some, then
mail us again.
Besides, override-change is *not* the way to change the maintainer
address in most cases. It doesn't and can't change the email address
everywhere (e.g. in the -I output of dpkg); the real way to change the
maintainer address is to upload a new package. If you haven't got
time to do that, why are you taking over the package?
> Giving the package maintainers more control over the overrides for
> their own packages seems a good strategy. Can you tell us why this
> approach was abandoned earlier?
How about because a certain developer would be free to NMU like it was
going out of fashion to ``fix'' crushingly urgent priority bugs?
--
James
Reply to: