Nick Black <nick.bl...@sprezzatech.com> writes: > I can assure you that close to 90% of SprezzOS packages use the flag, as > do a great many Ubuntu packages. Furthermore, anyone following the Debian > documentation at
> http://wiki.debian.org/Derivatives/Guidelines > is going to use this field. Please see "Packages", second line: > "When modifying source packages, rename the Maintainer field to > XSBC-Original-Maintainer and add a new Maintainer field." > If we're not going to know about this field in lintian, perhaps it > oughtn't be recommended to all derivatives. The field being useful, > however, I hope it will be retained. Just to clarify, the only thing I was objecting to was to allowing the header globally, as opposed to only in derivative profiles. I'm not sure that it makes sense to introduce it into Debian proper, and personally would like to have Lintian warn me if I had the header in my packaging. But it may be that I'm overthinking this; I suppose it's hard to see what actual harm the header causes in Debian proper and one person seems to find it useful. I certainly have no objections to recognizing the header for derivatives, where it serves a very useful purpose. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
