Raphael Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> writes: > I don't quite like the notion of "primarily responsible for the > preparation of this version", it's rather blur for packages that are > team maintained. In fact, the uploader might be the one who has done > the least...
> I think it's clearer to use Ben Finney's wording. It's the one releasing > the package that is listed in the changelog and it's signed by the > person uploading the package. > Suggestion: > The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog > should be the details of the person releasing this version. > They are not necessarily those of the usual package maintainer > or those of the uploader. [footnote] This is okay, although personally I'd mildly prefer "the person who prepared this release of the package," since still the uploader in a sponsoring situation is the one doing the releasing in Debian. Preparing the release is not the same thing as doing most of the work on the new version, and I think still keeps that distinct. > [footnote] > In the case of a sponsored upload, the uploader signs the files > but the changelog still mentions the name of the person who > prepared/released this version. I'd change prepared/released this version to "prepared this release," and a similar change below. > Furthermore, when the new version has not been prepared/released by one > of the usual maintainers of the package (as listed in the Maintainer or > Uploaders control fields of the package), the first line of the > changelog is conventionally used to explain why a non-maintainer is > uploading the package. The Debian Developer's Reference (see Related > documents, Section 1.4) documents the conventions used. I'd drop "Furthermore," when applying this, but otherwise the basic idea sounds good. -- 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
