On Saturday 15 July 2006 15:14, Ricardo Mones wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:49:10 +0200 > > Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So it is very well possible (but probably not a > > good idea) to perform real NMU as a maintainer. A lintian/linda check > > wouldn't give a false positive there. > > Indeed, I think is not a good idea too, but if the upload is ready and > the original maintainer has only time for reviewing it (and the bug is > important enough) is better to allow a developer to self-NMU than leaving > the bug unfixed.
In that case the real maintainer still can the credit to the person who actually fixed the things up and add himself to the changelog as this: package (regular upload revision, not NMUish) unstable; urgency=low [ Name of the stranger who actually made the fix ] * Fixed things... bla bla [ Maintainer ] * uploading/sponsoring fixes made by a Stranger/whoever... -- Maintainer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... date and it will be considered as a regular maintainer upload, since the the upload will be actually made by the person listed in Maintaner: or Uploaders: field. So, you will not confuse dak and bts, and it is clear who made what. -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
