Re: ITPs, wnpp, and Developer's Reference

2004-10-10 Thread Andreas Barth
* Jeroen van Wolffelaar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041010 16:30]: > The Developers reference isn't edited by QA, and ITP/RFP precedure isn't > related to QA either, IMHO. > > What do you intend by mailing this to debian-qa? If you want to see > developers-reference changed, I think you should argue your

Re: ITPs, wnpp, and Developer's Reference

2004-10-10 Thread Jeroen van Wolffelaar
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 04:16:42PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > The Developer's Reference *requires* an ITP for new packages (section > 5.1): The Developers reference isn't edited by QA, and ITP/RFP precedure isn't related to QA either, IMHO. What do you intend by mailing this to debian-qa? If

ITPs, wnpp, and Developer's Reference

2004-10-10 Thread Florian Weimer
The Developer's Reference *requires* an ITP for new packages (section 5.1): Assuming no one else is already working on your prospective package, you must then submit a bug report (Section 7.1, `Bug reporting') against the pseudo-package `wnpp' describing your plan to create a new

Status of developers-reference

2004-10-10 Thread Florian Weimer
The package claims that it's "normative", sort of: Furthermore, this document is _not an expression of formal policy_. It contains documentation for the Debian system and generally agreed-upon best practices. Thus, it is what is called a ``normative'' document. However, most