The bts script uses the packages.debian.org for reassign requests.
In general, I've found that it is incredibly useful to have addresses that reach the maintainers of a package without having to look that up in a database when you're dealing with cross-package issues generated by humans. For example if I'm discussing some change in my packages I'll copy the most affected dependent packages on mail to debian-devel. One of the important things to realize here is that the effort involved in me sending the message affects whether I'll do so. If I had to go look up the maintainers of the packages, I'd probably just send to debian-devel and not bother copying them. The fact that sending to packages.debian.org is easy for me as a human is why I do it. I've seen the same thing in other organizations. I work a lot in the IETF. Recently, within the last three or four years, the IETF created e-mail addresses for its drafts and working group chairs. Yes, you could go look up the authors and chairs yourself. However, the fact that it is so incredibly easy to copy the interested parties has improved a lot of communication. It also seems to be the case that people are doing reviews of other people's work more than they used to in part because the communication is easy. The same social pressures apply to at least me in my Debian work. The easier something is, the more likely I am to do the right thing. Looking up a maintainer address is enough more difficult than sending to packages.debian.org that it would affect what I do. With my MUA, having a shell command to output the maintainer of a package would also probably be sufficient. However if I was using Evolution or some other MUA without C-U m-! or if I did a lot of work on non-Debian systems, that would not be a sufficient replacement. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
