On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:54:09 +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> Clearly some teams will organise differently, and that's fine, but it would be
> nice if we could agree a set of guidelines for using the Maintainer/Uploaders
> fields consistently across teams.
There were two BOFs at DebConf about team-mai
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:32:25PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> From some of the private conversations I have had I am aware that some people
> do not feel it is appropriate to list a team's email address in the Uploaders
> field under any circumstances and others probably feel the same way about th
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:47:55PM +0200, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> This is not entirely true: each one can choose to set maintainer as the team
> or a "real person"; for example, take a look to every module I package[1] in
> the team: the Maintainer field is always set to the team.
I see, that's very
Hi Noah,
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 14:54, Noah Slater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been having some discussion with a member of the Erlang packaging team
> about best practice and comparing this with the Python Modules packaging team.
>
> The two teams approach things slightly diff
On Di, 26 Aug 2008, Noah Slater wrote:
> Clearly some teams will organise differently, and that's fine, but it would be
> nice if we could agree a set of guidelines for using the Maintainer/Uploaders
> fields consistently across teams.
I disagree. Teams work differently and thus the Maintainer/Upl
Hello,
I have been having some discussion with a member of the Erlang packaging team
about best practice and comparing this with the Python Modules packaging team.
The two teams approach things slightly differently...
Python Modules
* The focus is on individual maintainership
* Uploaders i
6 matches
Mail list logo
