Bug#454216: developers-reference: should better document how to send package removal requests
On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 03:02:45PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: +/replaceable replaceable[architecture list]/replaceable -- ^^ problem here If you prepare a patch, try make validate to verify the validity of the XML. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#454216: developers-reference: should better document how to send package removal requests
tags 454216 + pending thanks Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: +/replaceable replaceable[architecture list]/replaceable -- ^^ problem here For what it's worth, I'm not really sure that the dev-ref should include the acronym list. Another option would be to link to the removal pages of the ftp-team. I'd prefer that as well, it's easier to keep it up-to-date when we point to the official reference. I agree with Lucas, RoM should be mentionned as it concers directly the maintainers. Done now (and added a reference to the reportbug command). Committed as r5220. Marc -- Fachbegriffe der Informatik - Einfach erklärt 1: Multimedia funktioniert mit elektrischem Strom (Kristian Köhntopp) pgpXv4BlcSVG6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#454216: developers-reference: should better document how to send package removal requests
tags 454216 + patch thanks Heya, Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Section 5.9.2: Removing packages This section should describe how removal requests should be titled as stated in some pages[1][2][3]. Also, it should mention how to request the removal of an orphaned package[3], i.e. reassigning the O: bug to ftp.debian.org and retitling instead of sending a new report. To fix this, I would propose applying the following diff: Index: pkgs.dbk === --- pkgs.dbk(revision 5203) +++ pkgs.dbk(working copy) @@ -1222,14 +1222,44 @@ If for some reason you want to completely remove a package (say, if it is an old compatibility library which is no longer required), you need to file a bug against literalftp.debian.org/literal asking that the package be removed; -as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. Make sure you -indicate which distribution the package should be removed from. Normally, you -can only have packages removed from literalunstable/literal and -literalexperimental/literal. Packages are not removed from +as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. +The bug title should be in the form literalRM: replaceablepackage +/replaceable replaceable[architecture list]/replaceable -- +replaceablereason/replaceable, where replaceablepackage/replaceable +is the package to be removed and replaceablereason/replaceable is a +short summary of the reason for the removal request. +replaceable[architecture list]/replaceable is optional and only needed +if the removal request only applies to some architectures, not all. +/para + +para +To keep the bug title short, you can use one (or more) of the +following acronyms to indicate standard reasons for removal: +itemizedlist +listitemliteralROM/literal: Request of maintainer/listitem +listitemliteralRoQA/literal: Request of the QA team/listitem +listitemliteralROP/literal: Request of porter/listitem +listitemliteralROSRM/literal: Request of stable release +manager/listitem +listitemliteralNBS/literal: Not build [by any] source +[package]/listitem +listitemliteralNPOASR/literal: Never part of a stable +release/listitem +listitemliteralNVIU/literal: Newer version in unstable/listitem +listitemliteralANAIS/literal: Architecture not allowed in +source/listitem +listitemliteralICE/literal: Internal Compiler Error/listitem +/itemizedlist +/para + +para +Note that removals can only be done for the literalunstable +/literal, literalexperimental/literal and literalstable +/literal distribution. Packages are not removed from literaltesting/literal directly. Rather, they will be removed automatically after the package has been removed from -literalunstable/literal and no package in literaltesting/literal -depends on it. +literalunstable/literal and no package in literaltesting +/literal depends on it. /para para There is one exception when an explicit removal request is not necessary: If a @@ -1249,7 +1279,12 @@ para Usually you only ask for the removal of a package maintained by yourself. If you want to remove another package, you have to get the approval of its -maintainer. +maintainer. Should the package be orphaned and thus have no maintainer, +you should first discuss the removal request on email-debian-qa;. If +there is a consensus that the package should be removed, you should +reassign and retitle the literalO:/literal bug filed against the +literalwnpp/literal package instead of filing a new bug as +removal request. /para para Further information relating to these and other package removal related topics For what it's worth, I'm not really sure that the dev-ref should include the acronym list. Another option would be to link to the removal pages of the ftp-team. Marc -- BOFH #334: 50-- of the manual is in .pdf readme files pgpjxvMy8v866.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#454216: developers-reference: should better document how to send package removal requests
On 03/06/08 at 10:47 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: tags 454216 + patch thanks Heya, Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Section 5.9.2: Removing packages This section should describe how removal requests should be titled as stated in some pages[1][2][3]. Also, it should mention how to request the removal of an orphaned package[3], i.e. reassigning the O: bug to ftp.debian.org and retitling instead of sending a new report. To fix this, I would propose applying the following diff: Index: pkgs.dbk === --- pkgs.dbk (revision 5203) +++ pkgs.dbk (working copy) @@ -1222,14 +1222,44 @@ If for some reason you want to completely remove a package (say, if it is an old compatibility library which is no longer required), you need to file a bug against literalftp.debian.org/literal asking that the package be removed; -as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. Make sure you -indicate which distribution the package should be removed from. Normally, you -can only have packages removed from literalunstable/literal and -literalexperimental/literal. Packages are not removed from +as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. +The bug title should be in the form literalRM: replaceablepackage +/replaceable replaceable[architecture list]/replaceable -- +replaceablereason/replaceable, where replaceablepackage/replaceable +is the package to be removed and replaceablereason/replaceable is a +short summary of the reason for the removal request. +replaceable[architecture list]/replaceable is optional and only needed +if the removal request only applies to some architectures, not all. +/para + +para +To keep the bug title short, you can use one (or more) of the +following acronyms to indicate standard reasons for removal: +itemizedlist +listitemliteralROM/literal: Request of maintainer/listitem +listitemliteralRoQA/literal: Request of the QA team/listitem +listitemliteralROP/literal: Request of porter/listitem +listitemliteralROSRM/literal: Request of stable release +manager/listitem +listitemliteralNBS/literal: Not build [by any] source +[package]/listitem +listitemliteralNPOASR/literal: Never part of a stable +release/listitem +listitemliteralNVIU/literal: Newer version in unstable/listitem +listitemliteralANAIS/literal: Architecture not allowed in +source/listitem +listitemliteralICE/literal: Internal Compiler Error/listitem +/itemizedlist +/para + +para +Note that removals can only be done for the literalunstable +/literal, literalexperimental/literal and literalstable +/literal distribution. Packages are not removed from literaltesting/literal directly. Rather, they will be removed automatically after the package has been removed from -literalunstable/literal and no package in literaltesting/literal -depends on it. +literalunstable/literal and no package in literaltesting +/literal depends on it. /para para There is one exception when an explicit removal request is not necessary: If a @@ -1249,7 +1279,12 @@ para Usually you only ask for the removal of a package maintained by yourself. If you want to remove another package, you have to get the approval of its -maintainer. +maintainer. Should the package be orphaned and thus have no maintainer, +you should first discuss the removal request on email-debian-qa;. If +there is a consensus that the package should be removed, you should +reassign and retitle the literalO:/literal bug filed against the +literalwnpp/literal package instead of filing a new bug as +removal request. /para para Further information relating to these and other package removal related topics For what it's worth, I'm not really sure that the dev-ref should include the acronym list. Another option would be to link to the removal pages of the ftp-team. Agreed. Maybe just include ROM, and add a link for the other acronyms? -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#454216: developers-reference: should better document how to send package removal requests
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: +/replaceable replaceable[architecture list]/replaceable -- ^^ problem here For what it's worth, I'm not really sure that the dev-ref should include the acronym list. Another option would be to link to the removal pages of the ftp-team. I'd prefer that as well, it's easier to keep it up-to-date when we point to the official reference. I agree with Lucas, RoM should be mentionned as it concers directly the maintainers. Looks fine otherwise. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#454216: developers-reference: should better document how to send package removal requests
Lucas Nussbaum wrote: On 03/06/08 at 10:47 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: tags 454216 + patch thanks Heya, Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Section 5.9.2: Removing packages This section should describe how removal requests should be titled as stated in some pages[1][2][3]. Also, it should mention how to request the removal of an orphaned package[3], i.e. reassigning the O: bug to ftp.debian.org and retitling instead of sending a new report. To fix this, I would propose applying the following diff: For what it's worth, I'm not really sure that the dev-ref should include the acronym list. Another option would be to link to the removal pages of the ftp-team. Agreed. Maybe just include ROM, and add a link for the other acronyms? It would also be good to mention that reportbug does the right thing when you choose to file a bug against ftp.debian.org Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#454216: developers-reference: should better document how to send package removal requests
Package: developers-reference Version: 3.3.8 * Section 5.9.2: Removing packages This section should describe how removal requests should be titled as stated in some pages[1][2][3]. Also, it should mention how to request the removal of an orphaned package[3], i.e. reassigning the O: bug to ftp.debian.org and retitling instead of sending a new report. [1] http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.html [2] http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.txt [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/12/msg00077.html Sincerely, -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
