On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:52:03AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:05:28PM +0100, Jan Beyer a écrit : > > > > thanks for your reply. But I'm not quite convinced that you are right, > > because both the recent changelog entry of devscripts and the man page of > > uscan talk explicitly about debian/upstream/signing-key.[asc,gpg]... > > Hello everybody, > > this is discussed in #736760, and we need to decide whether devscripts cancel > their changes, or somebody organises a transition, or the DEP 12 project is > cancelled.
While I perfectly agree that it would have been the correct way to discuss claiming parts of the namespace first (heck, even if you do discuss changes for uscan at length like I did for Files-Excluded people raise their hands afterwards that should be implemented differently) I would volunteer to *help* (not lead) in a transition which means * reuploading files of Debian Med (and if needed of Debian Science and DebiChem) * working on the needed changes for UDD machine readable files gatherer However, my prefered solution for this problem would to start an open discussion on debian-devel for opinions about a potential new name for the signature file. This would have two advantages: 1. We might find some better consensus which could make a stressfull transition superfluous 2. Readers of the list would hopefully *learn* about both things (the signature file as well as the metadata file) >From my point of view the later is perhaps even more important. BTW, I would be quite happy if the work on upstream metadata which had been done in a quite big effort would be respected to some extend and not simply spoiled due to some naming choice. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org