Bug#459868: debian-policy: Definition of Maintainer: when using a mailing list
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 11274 March 1977, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>
>>> ---+++---
>>> If the Maintainer address points to a mailing list then that list must
>>> be configured to accept mail from those role accounts in Debian used to
>>> send automated mails regarding the package. This includes mail from the
>>> BTS, all mails from the archive software used on ftp-master as well as
>>> other role accounts that are commonly agreed on to send automated mails
>>> to the maintainers. a sample implementation of such a whitelist for
>>> mailman is running on alioth.debian.org.
>>> ---+++---
>
>> Not sure about that. Indeed there're braindead people out there who like
>> to forget about such things, but I'm not sure if a must clause in the
>> policy helps against this.
>
> It makes it much easier to file RC bugs against such packages and get
> people to actually do something.
and then the RC bugs will be closed as the list is fixed, and they will
be reported again if there's something buggy again. Not sure if that
really helps, not to forget that we don't have a bug in the software
here, but a bug in a list configuration. Prodding such maintainers
sounds like a good plan, but I'm not sure if the BTS is the right way.
Another thing that just jumped into my mind while reading your reply:
what about CCing the bug mails to the Uploader(s)? At the moment they
only go to the maintainer email, but in a lot of cases I'd prefer to get
a copy of the mail directly. In other cases the mailing list (with the
sometimes more active people) is listed in Uploaders, so it would be
good to CC them, too.
>
>> Also there're well configured lists, with mailman coughing on random
>> mails for no reason... Opening a mailing list for posts from
>> non-subscribers in general is not a really something you want, thanks
>> to the massive amount of spam you collect this way.
>
> Where did I write "in general" - I do hate spam too, thats why this is
> restricted to "open to role accounts", not "open to everyone".
You didn't write that - but if it's hard to realize the requirement due
to (randomly) buggy mailing list software (I think about sf.net for
example), the only option would be to open the list completely.
--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd@bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>
Reply to: