On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:12:22 +0200 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl <alexan...@schmehl.info> wrote:
> Hi! > > Am 15.06.2010 09:50, schrieb Neil Williams: > > > OTOH if those requesting sponsorship were more open to packaging some of > > the orphaned packages listed under WNPP and qa.debian.org which > > have already been through NEW .... > [..] > > What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for DM > > upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months > > without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is > > uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload > > field could also be set? > > It's not that easy, as the current criteria for a DM upload are DMUA:Yes > set AND listed as maintainer or uploader in the most recent upload to > experimentatl or unstable IIRC. True, but current criteria can be modified such as to assert that packa...@qa.debian.org is a "special maintainer" with regard to DM. All DD's are members of QA by default, it doesn't take much for that to be extended to those in the DM keyring. The primary restriction on uploads is the signing key, not necessarily the name or email address - this is especially true of QA packages which have no Maintainer: and no Uploaders: but every DD is allowed to upload with "QA upload" in the changelog and a valid DD signature on the .changes. > However, I like the idea :) :-) -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgpm5clobaAWN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
