package: debian-policy severity: wishlist version: 3.8.3.0 Forwarding a issue discussed on -policy to not forget the wishlist request. There appear to be consensus on the need of this, whereas the actual text still need to be fleshed out. The thread where this has been discussed starts at http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2009/12/msg00051.html
Cheers. ----- Forwarded message from Stefano Zacchiroli <[email protected]> ----- Dear policy list, during various NMU, it happened to me that the maintainer of the NMUed package reply with "thanks a lot, next time please also commit your changes to our VCS, which is writable by all DDs". While we do have a place where to describe the location of a VCS (the Vcs-* headers), we in fact have no place, AFAICT, where the developer can describe her preferences in how/who/when/.. committing to that VCS is indeed welcome. In the past I've found packages which does use README.source for that and apparently Charles (Cc-ed) already tried to advance such a proposal. In essence, it would just boil down to amend the description of the purpose of README.source in Policy to also cover this. What's your take on that? Please Cc-me on replies as I'm not subscribed to -policy. Cheers. ----- Forwarded message from Charles Plessy <[email protected]> ----- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:56:19 +0900 From: Charles Plessy <[email protected]> To: Stefano Zacchiroli <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#545515: mgltools-gle: diff for NMU version 1.5.4.cvs.20090603-1.1 Le Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 04:41:11PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit : > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 04:26:47PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > Thanks for the NMU. I commited your changes to Debian Med SVN. BTW, > > every DD can commit to this SVN as well - so feel free to do this in > > some similar case at your preference. > > > > Kind regards and thanks for catching this > > Noted, thanks (I kinda wish there is a standardized way to explain this > to NMUers ...), and thanks for having incorporated my changes this > quick! Hi Stefano, I proposed debian/README.source some time ago, but it proved controversial as debian/README.source is a README for the source package only, which excludes the VCS that contains it: 4.14 Source package handling: debian/README.source … debian/README.source may also include any other information that would be helpful to someone modifying the source package. Even if the package doesn't fit the above description, maintainers are encouraged to document in a debian/README.source file any source package with a particularly complex or unintuitive source layout or build system (for example, a package that builds the same source multiple times to generate different binary packages). Nevertheless, if you think the idea is worth the discussion, I can transfer it on [email protected] and propose to extend the purpose of README.source Have a nice day, -- Charles ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7 z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7 z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
