Re: Maintainer responsible for or only doing maintenance?

2012-06-01 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On 12-06-01 at 11:21am, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > [Jonas Smedegaard] > > Is my point clear now (even if is may disagree with my reasoning)? > > I find your point quite clear, but suspect you misunderstood those > claiming the sponsor have responsibilities regarding package > maintenance. >

Bug#675501: DDPO: Provide link to http://qa.debian.org/data/bts/graphs/by-maint/$EMAIL.png

2012-06-01 Thread Kari Pahula
Package: qa.debian.org Severity: wishlist Here's an idea: I'd like to see this on my DDPO page, along with the Bugs links: http://qa.debian.org/data/bts/graphs/by-maint/kaol%40debian.org.png";>graph Thank you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "u

Re: Maintainer responsible for or only doing maintenance?

2012-06-01 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
[Jonas Smedegaard] > Is my point clear now (even if is may disagree with my reasoning)? I find your point quite clear, but suspect you misunderstood those claiming the sponsor have responsibilities regarding package maintenance. To me it is obvious that the sponsor is also responsible for a pack

Re: Maintainer responsible for or only doing maintenance?

2012-06-01 Thread Russ Allbery
Jonas Smedegaard writes: > My point is that either we are all wasting our time declaring a > meaningless "Maintainer:" control field, or Bernd is wrong and the > uploader responsibility is for the contents of the upload - which > includes stating who is then to be held responsible for the > maint

Maintainer responsible for or only doing maintenance?

2012-06-01 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On 12-05-31 at 06:08pm, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Donnerstag, 31. Mai 2012, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > You still avoid my question: What does "Maintainer:" mean? > > why do you ask rhetoric questions? It's defined in policy and you know > it. So whats the point? Context of my question is Bernd a