Holger Levsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Whether or not it its an requirement to be able to contact the > author, doesnt have anything to do with obfuscating the email > address or not. (Assuming its not obfuscated beyond recognitition.)
That just pushes the question to a different location, without answering it: what do we accept as a valid email address, and what do we categorise as so far obfuscated that it's no longer useful. It also puts one in the untenable position of having to make *individual* decisions on every case of obfuscation: is this one too far munged? Is that one? On what do I base my judgement of "too far"? I argue that the only fair place to draw the line is "valid RFC 2821 email address". The alternative is to leave it to ongoing subjective judgement of unspecified Debian parties as to which addresses make sense or not — or to avoid the question of valid contact information altogether, as seems to be current practice. > (*) BTW, I dont have an example at hand, but I'm pretty sure I have > seen code in Debian written by anonymous and friends. You can't > contact them either. I don't doubt that's true. It's a regrettable situation, because the copyright statement for that person's work is unverifiable even at the time the code is accepted into Debian, let alone later in the future. -- \ Eccles: "I just saw the Earth through the clouds!" Lew: "Did | `\ it look round?" Eccles: "Yes, but I don't think it saw me." | _o__) -- The Goon Show, _Wings Over Dagenham_ | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
