On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> The author should get the credit, and more exposition...
Policy says /usr/doc//copyruight should say who written the
program. The credit should be already there.
> Or are we afraid that they might get bug reports that should go the the
> Debian bug
On Thu 08 Oct 1998, Edward Betts wrote:
>
> And while we are doing it how about implementing @m86k.porter.debian.org or
> @arm.builder.debian.org for the person who has recomplied the package on
> different machines (m86k, powerpc, alpha, arm, etc).
Now this _is_ a good idea! I've already asked o
Ian Jackson wrote:
> Martin Schulze writes ("Contacting authors"):
> > tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
> > would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
> > some piece of software without the need of look
Martin Schulze writes ("Contacting authors"):
> tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
> would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
> some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
> file or di
On Wed, 07 Oct, 1998, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Hi,
>
> tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
> would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
> some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
> file or digging in the source
Martin Schulze wrote:
> An easy way to implement this would be to simply add a line to the
> source section of debian/control of each package like
>
> Source: gtkfind
> Section: x11
> Priority: optional
> Maintainer: Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Author: Matt Grossman
Alexander Koch wrote:
> On Thu, 8 October 1998 00:07:26 +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Re spam: I'd like to make it optional so it does not have to be
> > used but only should. Each pkg. maintainer could negotiate with
> > the upstream author about this feature and not use it if the author
> > d
On Thu, 8 October 1998 00:07:26 +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Re spam: I'd like to make it optional so it does not have to be
> used but only should. Each pkg. maintainer could negotiate with
> the upstream author about this feature and not use it if the author
> doesn't like that.
That's what I
Martin Schulze writes:
> I'd like to make it optional so it does not have to be used but only
> should. Each pkg. maintainer could negotiate with
> the upstream author about this feature and not use it if the author
> doesn't like that.
The policy should emphasize that it not be used without cons
Joey Hess wrote:
> > Example: [EMAIL PROTECTED] would redirect the mail to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] who is the current developer of hypermail.
>
> It seems like a good idea in general. The only 2 problems I can see are that
> we would have to keep track of authors changing their email addresses, and
Martin Schulze wrote:
> What do you think about it?
>
> Example: [EMAIL PROTECTED] would redirect the mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] who is the current developer of hypermail.
It seems like a good idea in general. The only 2 problems I can see are that
we would have to keep track of authors changing
Martin Schulze wrote:
> tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
> would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
> some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
> file or digging in the source if the maintainer forgot to ad
Darren Benham wrote:
> Before packaging something, I check with the upstream author. I know it's GPL
> but I like to be polite about it. In one case, I had the upstream author make
> some "suggestions" and one of them was to make sure any and all mail about the
> package got sent to me. I think
Before packaging something, I check with the upstream author. I know it's GPL
but I like to be polite about it. In one case, I had the upstream author make
some "suggestions" and one of them was to make sure any and all mail about the
package got sent to me. I think he'd be an example of someone
David Welton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
So do we put Linus' address for the kernel packages?:P
I would suggest [EMAIL PROTECTED] for kernel-source.
On Wed, Oct 07, 1998 at 10:37:49PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Alexander Koch wrote:
> > Hi Joey.
> >
> > > What do you think about it?
> >
> > Will it produce more mail to the authors? Will *they* like it?
>
> Which author doesn't like to be contacted wrt his software?
So do we put Linus' a
Alexander Koch wrote:
> Hi Joey.
>
> > What do you think about it?
>
> Will it produce more mail to the authors? Will *they* like it?
Which author doesn't like to be contacted wrt his software?
Besides, you can leave it out.
Regards,
Joey
--
There are lies, statistics and benchmarks
Shaleh wrote:
>
> On 07-Oct-98 Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
> > would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
> > some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
> > file or
On 07-Oct-98 Martin Schulze wrote:
> Hi,
>
> tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
> would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
> some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
> file or digging in the source if the
Hi Joey.
> What do you think about it?
Will it produce more mail to the authors? Will *they* like it?
Besides that, it's at least useful.
Alexander
--
Alexander Koch - <>< - aka Efraim - PGP - 0xE7694969 - Hannover - Germany
pgpnc62DE5VwG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
file or digging in the source if the maintainer forgot to add the
authors email into
21 matches
Mail list logo
