Since we have no consensus on a change of semantic, field extension, field
renaming or deprecation in favour of something better, I came up with a doc
patch (attached because Github is down) that merely describes the current
practice in the wild. Some quotations from you that pull into this
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Lars Dɪᴇᴄᴋᴏᴡ
lars.diec...@googlemail.com wrote:
Since we have no consensus on a change of semantic, field extension, field
renaming or deprecation in favour of something better, I came up with a doc
patch (attached because Github is down) that merely describes
One point about contact points comes to mind: do we currently
allow/mention/encourage *multiple* contact addresses (be they email
addresses or something else)
People change jobs / email providers / graduate, and to better be able to
contact them, multiple addresses is better than a single one.
Jarkko wrote:
One point about contact points comes to mind: do we currently
allow/mention/encourage *multiple* contact addresses (be they email
addresses or something else)
Yes, we do:
http://module-build.sourceforge.net/META-spec.html#author
| author
|
| Example:
|
| author:
| - Ken
* David Golden xda...@gmail.com [2009-10-09T07:52:22]
22. Clarify author field
Proposal:
I would like to see some clarification of what an author is, especially
since the numbers of distros
Agreed.
* I think there are two things you want to know about the distribution: who
to
And contact for security stuff.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Steffen Mueller
nj88ud...@sneakemail.com wrote:
David Golden wrote:
22. Clarify author field
Consider that it's currently, practically used as a contact field. I get
lots of mail that should have gone to a mailing list
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:52 AM, David Golden xda...@gmail.com wrote:
22. Clarify author field
Proposal:
I would like to see some clarification of what an author is, especially
since the numbers of distros
+1 on clarification.
I don't have a strong feel for what to do about.
Simplest:
* David Golden xda...@gmail.com [2009-10-09T16:41:45]
Simplest: author is a list of contact points, which includes
authors, maintainers, mailing lists, etc.
I'd like to avoid a complex data structure.
If we deprecate author, I'd rather see contacts merged into
resources since we have
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Ricardo Signes
perl.cpanw...@rjbs.manxome.org wrote:
I'd rather just have one datum: in case of emergency, contact whom? Heck,
this
can be a mailing list. Oh, wait, we have a field for that! And we have a
field for bug tracker and home page.
So, a resource
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009, David Golden wrote:
Though to be fair, author is currently *required*, and I like the
idea that there be a required point of contact. However, I don't like
the idea of a mandatory resources field.
How about if it gets renamed auth and the description is author or
10 matches
Mail list logo
