Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> writes: > Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> writes:
>> Maybe that would be best. The concern that I had is that it wouldn't be >> clear that a package just being maintained upstream isn't sufficient; >> someone needs to be responsible for the package as it exists in Debian. > Part of my difficulty here is the lack of a succint term to refer to > “package for which Debian policy is intended to be normative”. > You've fallen into the same trap I did earlier: you referred to “the > package as it exists in Debian”, whereas as Charles pointed out, Debian > policy is meant to apply also to packages that *don't* exist in Debian. Yeah, there's that too. We're probably best off just saying that every package needs a maintainer. Hopefully it's clear enough since we're saying that the package needs one, not just the software. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87630ucyns....@windlord.stanford.edu
