However, if you were to request it - either through a member of core-dev - or through the person who last updated the package, then as long as yourdebian package worked exactly as it is intended to in ubuntu - I'm sure they'd not have a problem with syncing and using your package from debian.
The only reason packages are changed in ubuntu is because they don't work as expected in ubuntu - whether this be a different "vision" for the package's use, or just a problem with it having gone through a different transition/having a different toolchain, is a different point. But even so - We DO try and use as many things as possible from debian unchanged ;) Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Scripsit Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> If they are also compiled with a toolchain unchanged from Debian, >>> the binaries can legitimately have the same Maintainer: field as in >>> Debian, because they are essentially the same package. >>> If not, the binary packages should have different Maintainer: >>> fields, unless the maintainer agrees to have his name on it. >> You seem to require a standard of attribution in the Maintainer field >> that Debian does not itself follow in our default procedures. To wit: >> NMUs _within_ Debian keep the Maintainer field unchanged. > > The difference is that a Debian Maintainer can replace the NMU any > time he wants with his own package. > > I don't have the same ability to replace a non-Debian altered package. > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
