Package: developers-reference Version: 3.4.14 Severity: normal Tags: patch Hi,
Retirement from the project is a very personal thing, similar to leaving employment. In the latter case, there is no need to justify retirement to one's employer. There may be very good reasons why this also applies to leaving Debian. The developer's reference ยง3.2.5 currently says that one should "make sure to [...] send an email about why you are leaving the project to debian-private". IMO, this places undue onus on the developer to justify their retirement where he or she may not wish to do so. Please consider the attached patch, which rewords the advice into a courtesy mail rather than a "should" requirement. It's still necessary to mail debian-private, just not to include any justification. -- System Information: Debian Release: 8.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'testing-proposed-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
>From 635d6de2355337a345b866395bce8eb57b12280c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jonathan Wiltshire <j...@debian.org> Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2015 21:36:01 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Soften retirement procedure w.r.t. notifying other developers Signed-off-by: Jonathan Wiltshire <j...@debian.org> --- developer-duties.dbk | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/developer-duties.dbk b/developer-duties.dbk index 27a7ff7..e45e8ad 100644 --- a/developer-duties.dbk +++ b/developer-duties.dbk @@ -259,8 +259,9 @@ Orphan all your packages, as described in <xref linkend="orphaning"/>. </listitem> <listitem> <para> -Send an gpg-signed email about why you are leaving the project to -<email>debian-private@&lists-host;</email>. +Send an gpg-signed email announcing your retirement to +<email>debian-private@&lists-host;</email>. It's courteous, but not essential, +to include a brief explanation of your decision. </para> </listitem> <listitem> -- 2.1.4
