Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 02:56:18PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > RFC 5322 also prohibits non-ASCII characters, which would have to be > > > encoded in RFC 2047 encoding. > > > > Yeah, we don't want this. > > Luckily there is an established transformation for encoding non-ascii > in 5322

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 05:37:49PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > Let's also not store this in debian/control, but in something like the > package tracker. We can have the archive software put in a Maintainer > field with current syntax, if we want to, at least for a transition > period.

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

I feel like performing cruel acts on a previously viable equine entity. On Sun, 2018-04-22 at 14:56 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > I think this is not really desirable. It would be much better to make > the syntax a subset of 5322, at least. I think we should make this easy on ourselves. Let's

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

Andrey Rahmatullin writes ("Re: Comma in Maintainer field"): > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 04:24:59PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > I'd be more comfortable with this (well, RFC 5322 at this point), since > > this removes a lot of the insanity. However, note that

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 04:24:59PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > I'd be more comfortable with this (well, RFC 5322 at this point), since > this removes a lot of the insanity. However, note that this is > incompatible with existing Maintainer fields: RFC 5322 requires that . be > quoted. So any

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:07:56 +0900, Andreas Tille wrote: > So please all members of Natural Language Processing, Japanese team > update the maintainer field to some working e-mail address where the > name does not contain any ','. The affected source packages are: > > udd=# select distinct

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

Michael Stone writes: > Yes, it would probably be best to specify a restricted subset of > RFC822. Luckily most of the work for that was done in RFC2822, and it > would probably be sufficient to specify RFC2822 "mailbox" syntax with no > "obsolete" elements. Multiple mailboxes

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 07:56:46AM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: I don't know if in practice the various implementations are "close enough" for the purposes of the maintainer/uploader fields in the control file. However, there is a high likelihood that enough of them are different enough to

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 12:46:51PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Comma in Maintainer field"): > > I am opposed to this on the grounds that there are two types of RFC822 > > parsers in the world: correct ones that will drive you insane if you >

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Comma in Maintainer field"): > I am opposed to this on the grounds that there are two types of RFC822 > parsers in the world: correct ones that will drive you insane if you > attempt to understand them, and incorrect ones. Nearly all of them are in

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

Hi Russ, On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 06:26:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > From my understanding the names in quotes should be parsed correctly, > > right? > > Definitely not. They will absolutely break with some tools. Thanks for the clarification. So since we have clarified this now in this

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

Andreas Tille writes: > From my understanding the names in quotes should be parsed correctly, > right? Definitely not. They will absolutely break with some tools. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

Ian Jackson writes: > I think nowadays we should specify that this field, and Uploaders, are > in RF822 recipient field syntax. I am opposed to this on the grounds that there are two types of RFC822 parsers in the world: correct ones that will drive you insane

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 09:06:36AM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > youtube-dl seems to have this bug in jessie-backports only. It could be > fixed by a re-upload with only one maintainer. Bugs in backports are not > tracked in the Debian BTS[1] but I've contacted the backports mailing list > and

Re: Comma in Maintainer field (Was: problems in gjots2 and Debian)

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 06:58:00AM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > > udd=# select distinct maintainer from packages where maintainer like '%,%' > > order by maintainer; > > maintainer > > > >

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

Simon McVittie writes ("Re: Comma in Maintainer field"): > Perhaps the designers of dpkg intended the Maintainer and each > comma-separated Uploader to be an RFC 822 "mailbox", That is indeed what I remember intending. But evidently it's not what I wrote. I dug out

Re: Comma in Maintainer field (Was: problems in gjots2 and Debian)

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 08:37:07AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 09:52:18PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:00:51PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > Instead, tools grew to tolerate commas here rather than treat them as > > > separators

Re: Comma in Maintainer field (Was: problems in gjots2 and Debian)

Thank you Andreas, this is surprisingly interesting. On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 08:37:07AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > "Adam C. Powell, IV" > Adam C. Powell, IV > Debian GNOME Maintainers , > Sebastian

Re: Comma in Maintainer field (Was: problems in gjots2 and Debian)

Hi again, for sure I also here forgot the restriction to release='sid'... On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 19.04.2018 um 08:37 schrieb Andreas Tille: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 09:52:18PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:00:51PM

Re: Comma in Maintainer field

On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 at 08:37:07 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > Out of these there are clearly two bugs that violate our current [practices]: > > udd=# select distinct package, maintainer from packages where maintainer like > '%>%,%'order by maintainer; > package |

Re: Comma in Maintainer field (Was: problems in gjots2 and Debian)

Am 19.04.2018 um 08:37 schrieb Andreas Tille: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 09:52:18PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:00:51PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: >>> Instead, tools grew to tolerate commas here rather than treat them as >>> separators (because they would mishandle

Comma in Maintainer field (Was: problems in gjots2 and Debian)

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 09:52:18PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:00:51PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Instead, tools grew to tolerate commas here rather than treat them as > > separators (because they would mishandle the erroneous packages). > Is this the main