Bug#852677: Maintainer fields with multiple maintainers
While I agree that improving Maintainer and Uploaders fields is worthwhile, I
don't think this is the right approach.
> We should eventually change the specification to say that Maintainer
> fields have the same syntax as Uploaders.
There isn't a well defined syntax for Uploaders either, see #509935 and linked
bugs.
> In the meantime, we should explicitly state that a Maintainer field
> MUST NOT contain commas.
I would say we have a rough consensus to the contrary in #401452: the
Maintainer field can indeed contain commas as part of the maintainer's name and
that's not an issue as it is only permitted to contain one value.
--
Stuart Prescott http://www.nanonanonano.net/ stuart@nanonanonano.net
Debian Developer http://www.debian.org/ stuart@debian.org
GPG fingerprint 90E2 D2C1 AD14 6A1B 7EBB 891D BBC1 7EBB 1396 F2F7
Reply to: