On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 11:07:18AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 04:23:52PM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 02:28:28PM +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote: > > > > > qmail is meant as a replacement for the entire sendmail-binmail system > > > on typical Internet-connected UNIX hosts. See BLURB, BLURB2, BLURB3, and > > > BLURB4 in /usr/share/doc/qmail/ for more detailed advertisements. > > [...] > > > > This is not a proper ITP. You only mention where to find documentation > > on system with a supposedly already installed qmail. To file a proper > > ITP, make sure you've read the policy manual about what to put in the > > Policy doesn't dictate the format of an ITP message though, or even a > requirement to submit one. This particular ITP doesn't need to explain > what qmail is (the target audience already knows) and the ITP isn't > intended to be a review of the final descriptions.
While it's correct that the policy does not say anything about ITPs IMHO one of the reasons ITPs are usually CCed to debian-devel is the review short and long description. This review is quite important for the quality of these descriptions. So the ITP should in IMO include a draft of the final short and long description. Gaudenz -- Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~ Samuel Beckett ~ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]