>>>>> On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:25:03 +0100, Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> >> But >> >> they are in the PPD. Hmmm. I'd say, it should go away. The CPAN ID is >> >> fine, it is associated with a record in a public database and the >> >> record can be edited by the person. PAUSE could refuse an upload if >> >> the ID in the OSD isn't the same as the person doing the upload or >> >> some such. >> >> > Would you always want to force that. For example why would the perl distribution >> > not be able to set the field to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ? >> >> Who has the private key of the perl5-porters? I believe, the signing >> must remain a strictly personal testimony. We should be prepared to >> let many people sign something, e.g. a release manager makes the >> release and asks the pumpking to also sign. But a group as such can >> only be presented by one signature for each member. > The AUTHOR field is not related to the signature. Actually I would always > consider LArry as the author of perl, so I would expectLarry to appear > as the AUTHOR in the OSD, unless he said he wanted someother email address in there. Good point. There are many such cases on CPAN. PDL for example has often changing release manager. Archive::Tar has gone through several hands, When we realized that for the first time, we started to use the words "maintainer" and "contact" instead of "author". Only the directory "authors" remained with that name. For the purpose of making CPAN more maintainable, I see no need to have an AUTHOR field in the OSD. -- andreas
