* Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010404 03:19]:
> Maybe we should stop using <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as a Maintainer:
> address for packages maintained by QA and use somthing like
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
OK, I have created a forwarding alias. I will post an announcement
to d-d-a soon.
* Sean
BTW we need to ensure the documentation in Debian explains the orphaning
procedure and the correct email address to use.
On 04-Apr-2001 Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Currently the signal/noise ratio on this list is really bad (if you
> consider bug reports and dinstall messages as noise).
>
> Maybe we should stop using <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as a Maintainer:
> address for packages maintained by QA and use somthing like
> <
Hi Matej!
On Wed, 04 Apr 2001, Matej Vela wrote:
> I see your point, but there's no need to make extra work for ourselves.
> It would be better to create something like debian-qa-discuss and move
> to it right away...
This would be a solution but somehow I like debian-qa as a list for
discussion
On 01-04-04 Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Maybe we should stop using <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as a Maintainer:
> address for packages maintained by QA and use somthing like
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>
> For now this should be setup to forward all mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> but when enough packages use the ne
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 03:19:30AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Currently the signal/noise ratio on this list is really bad (if you
> consider bug reports and dinstall messages as noise).
>
> Maybe we should stop using <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as a Maintainer:
> address for packages maintained by QA
Currently the signal/noise ratio on this list is really bad (if you
consider bug reports and dinstall messages as noise).
Maybe we should stop using <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as a Maintainer:
address for packages maintained by QA and use somthing like
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
For now this should be setup t
7 matches
Mail list logo
