[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Schwarz) wrote on 02.02.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> What do you think of the following policy for maintainer fields:
>
> ---cut-here-
>
> Each maintainer gets a (within the Debian project) unique `mainta
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Christian:
> > It would be good if the people who want our policy to be changed in
> > this respect (Ian?) to tell us their opinion. I want to set up the DB
> > ASAP and this is the only open question that's left...
>
> Amongst addresses that I'm involved
Christian:
> It would be good if the people who want our policy to be changed in
> this respect (Ian?) to tell us their opinion. I want to set up the DB
> ASAP and this is the only open question that's left...
Amongst addresses that I'm involved with which Debian also has to deal
with:
For lout,
Firstly, I'd like to apologise for my rather intemperate message on
this subject last week. I'll post more later, but for now I'd just
like to say two things:
Firstly, as I understood it, current policy was that it was nice but
not required for maintainers to have exactly one address. This seems
On 29 Jan 1998, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yann Dirson) wrote on 28.01.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Ben Pfaff writes:
> > > - change the current DB schema to be able to store different
> > > "Maintainer:" email addresses for each person
> > >
> > > This is the b
Mark W. Eichin writes:
> (Besides, doesn't
> everyone do "dpkg --status package" and cut&paste anyway? Many people
> can't spell my username from memory anyhow...)
Nope. When I want to contact a maintainer about a specific package, I
usually use the "@packages.debian.org" addresses, which I
f
On Thu, 29 Jan 1998, Tommi Virtanen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 1998 at 05:44:37PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > The reason behind requiring a single email of the form
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was multifold; one was the database; but the
> > other, and in my opinion, more important reason w
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yann Dirson) wrote on 28.01.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Ben Pfaff writes:
> > - change the current DB schema to be able to store different
> > "Maintainer:" email addresses for each person
> >
> > This is the best solution IMHO. It is more flexible and doesn't f
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark W. Eichin) wrote on 28.01.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> everyone do "dpkg --status package" and cut&paste anyway? Many people
> can't spell my username from memory anyhow...)
Your username? There's nothing weird about it that I can see. Your
hostname, now ... ;-)
MfG K
On Wed, Jan 28, 1998 at 05:44:37PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> The reason behind requiring a single email of the form
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was multifold; one was the database; but the
> other, and in my opinion, more important reason was so thet there is
> an easy address format for
> other, and in my opinion, more important reason was so thet there is
> an easy address format for people to send mail to maintainers.
Umm, I'm not sure I *want* to make it easier for the users to send
mail to maintainers :-) Most of them use it instead of sending real
bug reports, and it wast
Hi,
The reason behind requiring a single email of the form
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was multifold; one was the database; but the
other, and in my opinion, more important reason was so thet there is
an easy address format for people to send mail to maintainers.
I know I can send mail
Ben Pfaff writes:
> - change the current DB schema to be able to store different
> "Maintainer:" email addresses for each person
>
> This is the best solution IMHO. It is more flexible and doesn't force
> adoption of a single e-mail address.
It seems solution #3 (registering full
- change the current DB schema to be able to store different
"Maintainer:" email addresses for each person
This is the best solution IMHO. It is more flexible and doesn't force
adoption of a single e-mail address. Although I myself only use a
single address, I respect the reasons of p
Hi folks!
As you all probably know, current policy suggests that each maintainer
uses the same email address on all his/her packages. This policy was
specified to allow a mechanical (i.e., via scripts) mapping from packages
to persons. (For example, this is needed to check for orphaned packages,
15 matches
Mail list logo
