[Pkg-phototools-devel] Writing the group Policy
d.paleino at gmail.com
Sun Dec 30 19:04:17 UTC 2007
Il giorno Sun, 30 Dec 2007 19:56:43 +0100
Sebastian Harl <sh at tokkee.org> ha scritto:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 07:25:34PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> > I think we should write a "group Policy", something like .
> Did you see Cyril's email () on that topic?
Yes, but I would've liked to have something on the website :)
> > There we should write how debian/control must be formatted, what build
> > system to use, and so on.
> I don't really like to make a policy on that kind of stuff. Different people
> prefer different tools and I don't see any reason to force them to use
> something they don't really like.
Well, I didn't mean that, sorry. Probably you understood forcing cdbs over
debhelper or kinda. See, for example, in Pkg-Perl we do prefer quilt over
dpatch, but the latter may be used as well. I just meant this, "we prefer
quilt, but you can use anything you like".
> > Why not adding the "primary responsible" to Maintainer field? Something
> > like:
> > Maintainer: PhotoTools Maintainers <>, Foo Bar <>
> > Uploaders: Foo Baz <>, Baz Bar <>
> No - the "Maintainer" field may only include a single entry. See policy 5.6.2
> (in contrast "Uploaders" [please note the plural, see 5.6.3] contains a list).
I know about the "Uploaders" plural (I currently maintain and co-maintain 38
packages in Debian :p). About the Maintainer field, please check my reply to
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://snipurl.com/qa_page
: :' : Linuxer #334216 | http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://www.debianizzati.org/
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-phototools-devel/attachments/20071230/f14ee85c/attachment.pgp
More information about the Pkg-phototools-devel