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

Bug#593611: Clarify whose signature should go in debian/changelog (4.4)



On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 09:10:58PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Okay, here's new proposed wording that incorporates some of the discussion
> on this bug along with my personal opinion on the best wording.  How does
> this look to everyone?
> 
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 642f672..314d5d0 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -1688,11 +1688,14 @@
>  
>  	<p>
>  	  The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog
> -	  should be the details of the person uploading <em>this</em>
> -	  version.  They are <em>not</em> necessarily those of the
> -	  usual package maintainer.<footnote>
> -	    If the developer uploading the package is not one of the usual
> -	    maintainers of the package (as listed in
> +	  should be the details of the person who prepared this release of
> +	  the package.  They are <em>not</em> necessarily those of the
> +	  uploader or usual package maintainer.<footnote>
> +	    In the case of a sponsored upload, the uploader signs the
> +	    files, but the changelog maintainer name and address are those
> +	    of the person who prepared this release.  If the preparer of
> +	    the release is not one of the usual maintainers of the package
> +	    (as listed in
>  	    the <qref id="f-Maintainer"><tt>Maintainer</tt></qref>
>  	    or <qref id="f-Uploaders"><tt>Uploaders</tt></qref> control
>  	    fields of the package), the first line of the changelog is

As I said earlier, I do not think that this matches current practices. 

As I see current practices:
1) the name in the changelog in the one of whoever ran dch last, i.e. the name of the developer
who changed the date in the changelog last. 

2) Someone sponsoring a package does not change it in any way.

Maybe this kind of information are better placed in the developer reference than in
policy.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 



Reply to: