Your message dated Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:47:32 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#51879: fixed in debian-policy 3.2.1.2
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 Dec 1999 23:56:39 +0000
Received: (qmail 11935 invoked from network); 3 Dec 1999 23:56:39 -0000
Received: from adsl-63-193-116-241.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO kitenet.net)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by master.debian.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 1999 23:56:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 31960 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 1999 23:56:35 -0000
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:56:35 -0800
From: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PROPOSAL: package may be maintained by a group
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Mutt/1.0i
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, Dec 03, 1999
at 09:58:46AM -0500
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
Raul Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 03:41:34PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > * "Every package must have exactly one maintainer at a time." This statement
> > is violated by so many packages (including dpkg) that it should be
> > removed.
>
> I think it's being interpreted as "one maintainer email address". But
> you're right, the language should be cleaned up, as in a number of
> cases that email address is a mailing list.
Ok, this is worth a separate proposal, so I now formally make one. I think I
have you and Brandon as seconds, please confirm.
I propose the following modification of policy:
--- policy.text.orig Fri Dec 3 15:50:05 1999
+++ policy.text Fri Dec 3 15:55:36 1999
@@ -466,8 +466,9 @@
2.3.2. The maintainer of a package
----------------------------------
- Every package must have exactly one maintainer at a time. This person
- is responsible that the license of the package's software complies
+ Every package must have exactly one maintainer at a time. The
+ maintainer may be a mailing list. The maintainer is responsible
+ for ensuring that the license of the package's software complies
with the policy of the distribution this package is included in.
The maintainer must be specified in the `Maintainer' control field
--
see shy jo
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 51879-close) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Jan 2001 20:10:28 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jan 18 14:10:26 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from murphy.debian.org [::ffff:216.234.231.6]
by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14JLO5-0001TK-00; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:10:25 -0600
Received: (qmail 829 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2001 19:48:46 -0000
Received: from auric.debian.org ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by murphy.debian.org with SMTP; 18 Jan 2001 19:48:46 -0000
Received: from troup by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14JL1w-0006sn-00; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:47:32 -0500
From: Debian Policy List <debian-policy@lists.debian.org>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bug#51879: fixed in debian-policy 3.2.1.2
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:47:32 -0500
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
debian-policy, which has been installed in the Debian FTP archive:
debian-policy_3.2.1.2.dsc
to pool/main/d/debian-policy/debian-policy_3.2.1.2.dsc
debian-policy_3.2.1.2_all.deb
to pool/main/d/debian-policy/debian-policy_3.2.1.2_all.deb
policy.text.gz byhand
policy.html.tar.gz byhand
menu-policy.text.gz byhand
debian-policy_3.2.1.2.tar.gz
to pool/main/d/debian-policy/debian-policy_3.2.1.2.tar.gz
virtual-package-names-list.text byhand
mime-policy.text.gz byhand
policy.ps.gz byhand
policy.pdf.gz byhand
libc6-migration.text byhand
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.
Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Debian Policy List <debian-policy@lists.debian.org> (supplier of updated
debian-policy package)
(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED])
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 01:43:58 -0600
Source: debian-policy
Binary: debian-policy
Architecture: source all
Version: 3.2.1.2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Policy List <debian-policy@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description:
debian-policy - Debian Policy Manual and related documents
Closes: 51879 53496 53700 55048 55730 57154 59403 65765 66912 76028
Changes:
debian-policy (3.2.1.2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* The minimal change in version number is so that people can test and
root out the bugs in this document before we make everyone change to
this version.
* Document the Enhances relationship
* Removed the restriction that one, and exactly one, person must
maintain a package. closes: Bug#51879
* Fixed a typo, and added the nogroup name, in uid/gid section of
policy. closes: Bug#53496
* Fixed a misstatement in policy about not needing to depend on packages
in the base system (not true -- the Essential tag is significant)
closes: Bug#53700
* Clarified update-rc.d stuff closes: Bug#55048
.
* We have already included the material for shlibdep changes, and most
of this is not relevant to policy anyway. closes: Bug#55730
* makedev--> MAKEDEV closes: Bug#57154
* Added restrictions on the files in /usr/share/doc/
closes: Bug#59403
* Changed location of a paragraph about copyright files into the section
that deals with copyright files. closes: Bug#65765
* init script configuration variables closes: Bug#66912
* Clarifed language about packages sharing a conffile need to be marked
as conflicting closes: Bug#76028
Files:
7873b3a6ddd5f3fc015ccb2aaae800a8 662 doc optional debian-policy_3.2.1.2.dsc
9cbc8f71b1bb280c441a9e33cc85daa5 486560 doc optional
debian-policy_3.2.1.2.tar.gz
04d4f5d13f7ab04c97034c884e6425b4 542540 doc optional
debian-policy_3.2.1.2_all.deb
42928cef99fee859b6442277e91eeb22 120715 byhand - policy.ps.gz
9632447891b3a57f956b52c80fd177e7 208362 byhand - policy.pdf.gz
0fbf6fcc843ed1c928f5f92b05949c43 66419 byhand - policy.html.tar.gz
203f852c33bd0d6df7b8a66977728d98 62122 byhand - policy.text.gz
3ed7aa5a489834b24bb28ff377a34aa9 10982 byhand - libc6-migration.text
1e4917c791262f0cd6de796444e51c86 7785 byhand - virtual-package-names-list.text
1b08168ee1c506d3475612bc4d3cdbbf 2180 byhand - menu-policy.text.gz
52f844690780aef153828e7325e90d91 1599 byhand - mime-policy.text.gz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE6ZqAGIbrau78kQkwRAdekAKDV1PGCUax5rPPt54LgMtGzQA5odACdH0xE
RX5CFc75JTHxEfEmaPEfUPk=
=+KRS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
