On 22/09/10 13:53, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Thinking about it, what we _conceptually_ need is pretty simple: a > mechanism to declare who is the Maintainer of the bpo package and > enforce its declaration. The responsibility of bpo maintenance will be > on the declared bpo maintainer. If the default maintainer wants to be > the bpo maintainer too, fine; if someone else wants to, fine too. One > way to do that would be to require setting new values for > Maintainer/Uploaders, possibly backing up the default values to > Orig-{Maintainer,Uploaders} [1]. Is there any reason *not* to do that?
Since people are basically arguing about the bug traffic, maybe require a Bugs: field when doing a NMU to backports? Unfortunately, this doesn't help when the faulty backport is a library which causes another binary to fail. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature