On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 05:11:19PM +0200, Xavier Oswald wrote:
> On 18:37 Thu 31 May , Anthony Towns wrote:
> > - minimal requirements: gpg keyring signed by either one or two
> > developers, recommendation by a developer, use of existing
> > fields such as "Maintainer:" and "Uploaders:" to control access,
> > no provision for uploaders to do NMUs or upload NEW packages etc
> I think the use of an existing fields "Maintainer" should do the job
> but Im not in favour of "Uploaders". Im throught the NM process and
> member of the parted team so Im in the uploaders field. If I will have
> this kind of right, I could be able to upload a new version of parted
> and maybe then broke the d-i for exemple.
Well if you thought you might break something then presumably you
wouldn't upload. But developers upload broken packages occasionally
too. I don't think we should restrict this based on the possibility
that people will break something.
As a developer you have to try to exercise good judgement and as a
maintainer you would have to too.
--
Simon Huggins \ "Emergency! Emergency! There's an emergency going on!"
\ - Holly
http://www.earth.li/~huggie/ htag.pl 0.0.22
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
