Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 08:47:54 -0700
- From: Sean Whitton <spwhitton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
Hello Ian, On Wed, Apr 18 2018, Ian Jackson wrote: > IMO it would be better to abolish Uploaders in favour of fixing the > original spec bug in Maintainers. Also, easier, because as a > practical matter, there is a lot of software that will fail if it > fails to find a Maintainer field but won't really mind what it > contains. AIUI the tracker.debian.org team are working to make it possible to list the package tracker as the package maintainer, I believe using the old foo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx address. Then all co-maintainers of the package will - list themselves in Uploaders - subscribe to the package on tracker.d.o In this way, we transition away from a semantic distinction between Maintainer and Uploaders without having to change any tools. It's much less work than what you are proposing. People who want to maintain the distinction can use the fields separately but those who want maintainers to be on equal footing don't have to. -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: Ian Jackson
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- References:
- problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: Rolf Leggewie
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: Martin Steigerwald
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: Andrey Rahmatullin
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: The Wanderer
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: Ansgar Burchardt
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: The Wanderer
- Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- From: Ian Jackson
- problems in gjots2 and Debian
- Prev by Date: Re: Bug#895928: ITP: python-base58 -- base58 encode/decode for Python
- Next by Date: Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- Previous by thread: Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- Next by thread: Re: problems in gjots2 and Debian
- Index(es):