Bug#401452: Please clarify the format of the maintainer address to use in Maintainer: and Uploader:

2007-03-06 Thread Enrico Zini
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 12:30:23AM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
 On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 05:49:23PM +, Enrico Zini wrote:
   enrico Just when I wanted to split Maintainer fields my commas, I
   stumble on Maintainer: Adam C. Powell, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 There is no reason to split Maintainer fields, because they should be
 nothing to split.
  This is not a big problem for me now, since I can work around the issue
  by using two different functions to handle Maintainer and Uploaders, one
  that does not try to split on commas and the other that does.
 You should probably have two different functions anyway, because if you
 encountered a Maintainer field with two values, that would be illegal. :)

That is very right indeed :)

So the part about the Uploader field (5.6.3. `Uploaders') probably
needs changing, where it says:

The format is the same as that of the Maintainer tag, and
multiple entries should be comma separated.

I started writing a possible amended text, but I stopped not knowing if
commas are to be allowed within double quotes (as in Adam C. Powell,
IV ...) or to be disallowed altogether.


Ciao,

Enrico

-- 
GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini [EMAIL PROTECTED]


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Bug#401452: Please clarify the format of the maintainer address to use in Maintainer: and Uploader:

2007-01-14 Thread Josip Rodin
On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 05:49:23PM +, Enrico Zini wrote:
  enrico Just when I wanted to split Maintainer fields my commas, I
  stumble on Maintainer: Adam C. Powell, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED]

There is no reason to split Maintainer fields, because they should be
nothing to split.

 This is not a big problem for me now, since I can work around the issue
 by using two different functions to handle Maintainer and Uploaders, one
 that does not try to split on commas and the other that does.

You should probably have two different functions anyway, because if you
encountered a Maintainer field with two values, that would be illegal. :)

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#401452: Please clarify the format of the maintainer address to use in Maintainer: and Uploader:

2006-12-03 Thread Enrico Zini
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.7.2.2
Severity: wishlist

Hello,

 enrico Just when I wanted to split Maintainer fields my commas, I
 stumble on Maintainer: Adam C. Powell, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 enrico Now I'll just split Uploader: gfields by commas
liw enrico, hmm, should the Maintainer field not be an rfc822
 compatible e-mail address spec?
 enrico liw: I'll check the policy
liw hmm, the policy only mentions a problem with periods
 enrico liw: and only the mail address seems to be RFC822

Section 5.6.2. `Maintainer' says:

 The package maintainer's name and email address.  The name should come
 first, then the email address inside angle brackets `' (in RFC822
 format).

 If the maintainer's name contains a full stop then the whole field
 will not work directly as an email address due to a misfeature in the
 syntax specified in RFC822; a program using this field as an address
 must check for this and correct the problem if necessary (for example
 by putting the name in round brackets and moving it to the end, and
 bringing the email address forward).

Now, the field Adam C. Powell, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] seems to be
legal according to current policy.  However, later in 5.6.3.
`Uploaders' the policy says:

 The format is the same as that of the Maintainer tag, and multiple
 entries should be comma separated.

This would imply that commas should not be used in the Maintainer field.

This is not a big problem for me now, since I can work around the issue
by using two different functions to handle Maintainer and Uploaders, one
that does not try to split on commas and the other that does.

However, this issue seems to require a little clarification.


Ciao,

Enrico


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-2-686
Locale: LANG=it_IT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=it_IT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)

-- no debconf information


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]