Bug#459868: debian-policy: Definition of Maintainer: when using a mailing list
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> Maybe that would be best. The concern that I had is that it wouldn't
> be clear that a package just being maintained upstream isn't
> sufficient; someone needs to be responsible for the package as it
> exists in Debian.
Part of my difficulty here is the lack of a succint term to refer to
“package for which Debian policy is intended to be normative”.
You've fallen into the same trap I did earlier: you referred to “the
package as it exists in Debian”, whereas as Charles pointed out, Debian
policy is meant to apply also to packages that *don't* exist in Debian.
--
\ “If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will |
`\ not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog |
_o__) and a man.” —Mark Twain, _Pudd'n'head Wilson_ |
Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au>
Reply to: