Bug#588014: Documenting the DM-Upload-Allowed field.
owner 588014 ple...@debian.org thanks Dear all, since I am working on the chapter 5, I propose to add the description of the Dm-Upload-Allowed field in the Policy. The attached patch was prepared by pasting extracts from the DM GR. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan From afc7e21761d79efdab3e38cc341a9a8107794384 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 22:38:28 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] Documents the DM-Upload-Allowed field, Closes: #588014. --- policy.sgml | 15 +++ 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml index 6da634e..2ed808a 100644 --- a/policy.sgml +++ b/policy.sgml @@ -2555,6 +2555,7 @@ Package: libc6 itemqref id=f-SourcettSource/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-MaintainerttMaintainer/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-UploadersttUploaders/tt/qref/item + itemqref id=f-Dm-Upload-AllowedttDm-Upload-Allowed/tt/qref/item itemqref id=f-SectionttSection/tt/qref (recommended)/item itemqref id=f-PriorityttPriority/tt/qref (recommended)/item itemqref id=sourcebinarydepsttBuild-Depends/tt et al/qref/item @@ -2650,6 +2651,7 @@ Package: libc6 itemqref id=f-VersionttVersion/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-MaintainerttMaintainer/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-UploadersttUploaders/tt/qref/item + itemqref id=f-Dm-Upload-AllowedttDm-Upload-Allowed/tt/qref/item itemqref id=f-HomepagettHomepage/tt/qref/item itemqref id=f-Standards-VersionttStandards-Version/tt/qref (recommended)/item itemqref id=sourcebinarydepsttBuild-Depends/tt et al/qref/item @@ -2807,6 +2809,19 @@ Package: libc6 /p /sect1 + sect1 id=f-Dm-Upload-Allowed + headingttDm-Upload-Allowed/tt/heading + + p + The most recent version of a package uploaded to unstable or + experimental must include the field DM-Upload-Allowed: yes in the + source section of its source control file for the Debian archive to + accept uploads signed with a key in the Debian Maintainer keyring. + See the General Resolution url id=http://www.debian.org/vote/2007/vote_003; + name=Endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers for more details. + /p + /sect1 + sect1 id=f-Changed-By headingttChanged-By/tt/heading -- 1.7.1
Bug#588014: Documenting the DM-Upload-Allowed field.
On 11/09/10 15:50, Charles Plessy wrote: Subject: [PATCH] Documents the DM-Upload-Allowed field, Closes: #588014. + itemqref id=f-Dm-Upload-AllowedttDm-Upload-Allowed/tt/qref/item + itemqref id=f-Dm-Upload-AllowedttDm-Upload-Allowed/tt/qref/item + sect1 id=f-Dm-Upload-Allowed + headingttDm-Upload-Allowed/tt/heading + experimental must include the field DM-Upload-Allowed: yes in the Capitalization is inconsistent across the patch. I guess you should fix that. Regards, Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c8b8ef3.4000...@debian.org
Bug#588014: Documenting the DM-Upload-Allowed field.
Le Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit : Capitalization is inconsistent across the patch. I guess you should fix that. Ooops (correction attached). -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan From 2b09eca1c6628bb1cacd864195f89a5c968f619c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 22:38:28 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] Documents the DM-Upload-Allowed field, Closes: #588014. --- policy.sgml | 15 +++ 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml index 8a2c25e..23fb14b 100644 --- a/policy.sgml +++ b/policy.sgml @@ -2566,6 +2566,7 @@ Package: libc6 itemqref id=f-SourcettSource/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-MaintainerttMaintainer/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-UploadersttUploaders/tt/qref/item + itemqref id=f-DM-Upload-AllowedttDM-Upload-Allowed/tt/qref/item itemqref id=f-SectionttSection/tt/qref (recommended)/item itemqref id=f-PriorityttPriority/tt/qref (recommended)/item itemqref id=sourcebinarydepsttBuild-Depends/tt et al/qref/item @@ -2661,6 +2662,7 @@ Package: libc6 itemqref id=f-VersionttVersion/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-MaintainerttMaintainer/tt/qref (mandatory)/item itemqref id=f-UploadersttUploaders/tt/qref/item + itemqref id=f-DM-Upload-AllowedttDM-Upload-Allowed/tt/qref/item itemqref id=f-HomepagettHomepage/tt/qref/item itemqref id=f-Standards-VersionttStandards-Version/tt/qref (recommended)/item itemqref id=sourcebinarydepsttBuild-Depends/tt et al/qref/item @@ -2815,6 +2817,19 @@ Package: libc6 /p /sect1 + sect1 id=f-DM-Upload-Allowed + headingttDM-Upload-Allowed/tt/heading + + p + The most recent version of a package uploaded to unstable or + experimental must include the field DM-Upload-Allowed: yes in the + source section of its source control file for the Debian archive to + accept uploads signed with a key in the Debian Maintainer keyring. + See the General Resolution url id=http://www.debian.org/vote/2007/vote_003; + name=Endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers for more details. + /p + /sect1 + sect1 id=f-Changed-By headingttChanged-By/tt/heading -- 1.7.1
Bug#593909: debian-policy: Clarifications about the syntax of Debian control files.
Le Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 06:52:15PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : The distinction really is that some fields can be folded (Build-*, for example) and some fields are multi-line (Description, Files). The multi-line fields are not folded in the RFC 5322 sense, since you cannot just remove the newlines and have semantically the same content. Those fields (Description, Files) are a separate type of field that RFC 5322 doesn't have. I think that it is an excellent idea to use the vocabulary of the RFC. It has been written many times that the control files follow the syntax of the RFC 822 and its successors, and I think that it would help to show where this is true and where it is not. In the attached patch, I refer to the RFC 2822: isn't 5322 a draft ? Also, I integrated your comment about the relationships fields, that can not be folded elsewhere than in source package files. The attached patch also contains the (corrected) addition of the DM-Upload-Allowed field. I wonder if it would be worthwile to add the Bugs and Origin fields as well. Have a nice Sunday, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml index edd1faf..23fb14b 100644 --- a/policy.sgml +++ b/policy.sgml @@ -2449,19 +2449,22 @@ endif fieldsfootnote The paragraphs are also sometimes referred to as stanzas. /footnote. - The paragraphs are separated by blank lines. Some control + The paragraphs are separated by empty lines. As a special exception + for backwards compatibility, parsers may accept lines consisting + solely of spaces and tabs as paragraph separators. Some control files allow only one paragraph; others allow several, in which case each paragraph usually refers to a different package. (For example, in source packages, the first paragraph refers to the source package, and later paragraphs - refer to binary packages generated from the source.) + refer to binary packages generated from the source.). The + ordering of the paragraphs in control files is significant. /p p Each paragraph consists of a series of data fields; each field consists of the field name, followed by a colon and then the data/value associated with that field. It ends at - the end of the (logical) line. Horizontal whitespace + the end of a logical line (see below). Horizontal whitespace (spaces and tabs) may occur immediately before or after the value and is ignored there; it is conventional to put a single space after the colon. For example, a field might @@ -2479,22 +2482,42 @@ Package: libc6 /p p - Many fields' values may span several lines; in this case - each continuation line must start with a space or a tab. - Any trailing spaces or tabs at the end of individual - lines of a field value are ignored. + Fields values may be contained in a logical line that spans + several lines; these lines are called continuation lines and + must start with a space or a tab. Any trailing spaces or tabs + at the end of individual lines of a field value are ignored. /p p - In fields where it is specified that lines may not wrap, - only a single line of data is allowed and whitespace is not - significant in a field body. Whitespace must not appear + Continuation lines need to be allowed for each field separately, + by specifiying that the field can be folded or that it is multiline. + list compact=compact + item + In fields that can be folded, whitespace including newlines + is not significant in the field valuesfootnote + This allows simple control files that contain only one paragraph + and no multiline field to be read by parsers written for + the RFC 2822./footnote. + /item + item + In multiline fields, whitespace including newlines is significant. + /item + /list + /p + + p + Whitespace must not appear inside names (of packages, architectures, files or anything else) or version numbers, or between the characters of multi-character version relationships. /p p + The presence and purpose of a field, and the syntax of its + value may differ between types of control files. + /p + + p Field names are not case-sensitive, but it is usual to capitalize the field names using mixed case as shown below. Field values are case-sensitive unless the description of the @@ -2502,9 +2525,17 @@ Package: libc6 /p p - Blank lines, or lines consisting only of spaces and tabs, - are not allowed within field values or between fields - that - would mean a new paragraph. + Paragraph separators (empty lines) and lines consisting only of + spaces and tabs are not allowed within field values or between + fields. Empty lines in field values are usually escaped by + representing them by a space followed by a dot. + /p + + p + Lines starting with # without any preceding whitespace are
Bug#588014: Documenting the DM-Upload-Allowed field.
On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 23:47 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit : Capitalization is inconsistent across the patch. I guess you should fix that. Ooops (correction attached). I support the change, with the correction. Cheers, Andrew. -- andrew (AT) morphoss (DOT) com+64(272)DEBIAN To communicate is the beginning of understanding. -- ATT -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1284246206.18652.149.ca...@dave.home.mcmillan.net.nz
