Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 17:13:08 +0200
- From: Alex Mestiashvili <amestia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
On 04/18/2018 05:01 PM, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2018-04-18 at 10:53, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> On Wed, 2018-04-18 at 10:45 -0400, The Wanderer wrote
>>> On 2018-04-18 at 05:55, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>>>> But that didn't happen, unless you put different meaning into
>>>> Maintainer and Uploaders.
>>> If you don't assign different meanings to "Maintainer:" and
>>> "Uploaders:", what's the point in both fields existing?
>> The Maintainer field is only allowed to list one person for historic
>> reasons. So a new field was added to list additional maintainers.
> If it really is intended that the listed Maintainer be on an equal
> footing with any and all listed Uploaders, and there's no semantic
> difference between these fields - just the arbitrary limitation that one
> of them can't have more than one entry - wouldn't it make sense to
> deprecate the Maintainer: field, and move towards using Uploaders: only?
> I'm not sure that would be a good idea, but it would at least avoid the
> apparent misunderstanding of the meaning of the roles which seems to
> have underlain some of the dispute in this case, and eliminating
> meaningless redundancy in a spec is generally a good thing.
Team maintained packages usually have team's name and mailing list in
the "Maintainer:" field and possibly multiple "Uploaders:".