Re: [PureOS] Droping the Uploader field in d/control within PureOS?
Hi Guido, Am 25.09.21 um 12:09 schrieb Guido Günther:
What is the rationale behind that note?
This documents current practice (I documented what I found when looking into getting packages into PureOS proper).
If you think it's a bad idea just
- make a proposal (e.g. drop, change to XSBC-*) on tracker.pureos.net. - if there's a discussion let's find consensus - if there's no discussion even better (i'd wait for >2w for feedback) - adjust the documentation - close the issue
thanks, so there is no hard reasoning for the current state. I'll follow your suggestion within the next days, the mentioned solution is btw. the best way to get this done I think. -- Regards Carsten Schoenert
Quoting Carsten Schoenert (2021-09-25 18:08:11)
Am 25.09.21 um 12:09 schrieb Guido Günther:
What is the rationale behind that note?
This documents current practice (I documented what I found when looking into getting packages into PureOS proper).
If you think it's a bad idea just
- make a proposal (e.g. drop, change to XSBC-*) on tracker.pureos.net. - if there's a discussion let's find consensus - if there's no discussion even better (i'd wait for >2w for feedback)
- adjust the documentation - close the issue
thanks, so there is no hard reasoning for the current state.
I'll follow your suggestion within the next days, the mentioned solution is btw. the best way to get this done I think.
Yet again a nice response from Guido. @Guido: Please remember to post such wisdom to the list. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Am Sa., 25. Sept. 2021 um 19:04 Uhr schrieb Jonas Smedegaard <jonas.smedegaard@puri.sm>:
Quoting Carsten Schoenert (2021-09-25 18:08:11)
Am 25.09.21 um 12:09 schrieb Guido Günther:
What is the rationale behind that note?
This documents current practice (I documented what I found when looking into getting packages into PureOS proper).
If you think it's a bad idea just
- make a proposal (e.g. drop, change to XSBC-*) on tracker.pureos.net. - if there's a discussion let's find consensus - if there's no discussion even better (i'd wait for >2w for feedback)
- adjust the documentation - close the issue
thanks, so there is no hard reasoning for the current state.
I'll follow your suggestion within the next days, the mentioned solution is btw. the best way to get this done I think.
Yet again a nice response from Guido.
Hey :-) I'm late to the party, but there actually is/was a rationale for keeping the Uploaders field intact: It's simply that we don't need to modify it for PureOS as all packages are effectively team-maintained by PureOS developers anyway, and by changing it there would be one more thing to amend and one more delta to Debian to take care of. So leaving it as-is is just a convenience/laziness issue ;-) I have no feelings in either direction for changing the status quo (if we do, having a tool like Ubuntu's update-maintainer[1] would be nice though...) Cheers, Matthias [1]: https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/impish/man1/update-maintainer.1.html
Hi Matthias, Quoting Matthias Klumpp (2021-09-25 20:02:41)
Am Sa., 25. Sept. 2021 um 19:04 Uhr schrieb Jonas Smedegaard <jonas.smedegaard@puri.sm>:
Quoting Carsten Schoenert (2021-09-25 18:08:11)
Am 25.09.21 um 12:09 schrieb Guido Günther:
What is the rationale behind that note?
I'm late to the party, but there actually is/was a rationale for keeping the Uploaders field intact: It's simply that we don't need to modify it for PureOS as all packages are effectively team-maintained by PureOS developers anyway, and by changing it there would be one more thing to amend and one more delta to Debian to take care of. So leaving it as-is is just a convenience/laziness issue ;-)
I have no feelings in either direction for changing the status quo (if we do, having a tool like Ubuntu's update-maintainer[1] would be nice though...)
Thanks for the historical insight, Matthias. I certainly think that we should provide accurate information - and as a minimum we should comply with Debian Policy which defines the Uploaders field as containing...
List of the names and email addresses of co-maintainers of the package
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#uploaders I.e. I find it misleading for that field to contain email addresses of *upstream* co-maintainers. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Hi, On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 07:04:12PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Carsten Schoenert (2021-09-25 18:08:11)
Am 25.09.21 um 12:09 schrieb Guido Günther:
What is the rationale behind that note?
This documents current practice (I documented what I found when looking into getting packages into PureOS proper).
If you think it's a bad idea just
- make a proposal (e.g. drop, change to XSBC-*) on tracker.pureos.net. - if there's a discussion let's find consensus - if there's no discussion even better (i'd wait for >2w for feedback)
- adjust the documentation - close the issue
thanks, so there is no hard reasoning for the current state.
I'll follow your suggestion within the next days, the mentioned solution is btw. the best way to get this done I think.
Yet again a nice response from Guido.
@Guido: Please remember to post such wisdom to the list.
I sure did, my sender address just was rejected since mutt's sender matching tricked me. -- Guido
- Jonas
-- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Quoting Guido Günther (2021-09-27 09:20:11)
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 07:04:12PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
@Guido: Please remember to post such wisdom to the list.
I sure did, my sender address just was rejected since mutt's sender matching tricked me.
Thanks for unveiling that mystery: I was puzzled that you could ever make mistakes and triple-checked before posting that remark! :-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Hi, On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:17:54AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Guido Günther (2021-09-27 09:20:11)
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 07:04:12PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
@Guido: Please remember to post such wisdom to the list.
I sure did, my sender address just was rejected since mutt's sender matching tricked me.
Thanks for unveiling that mystery: I was puzzled that you could ever
I only noticed because i found my own reply in another folder - so multiple errors at play here and i don't even count typos ;)
make mistakes and triple-checked before posting that remark! :-)
How come I feel mocked now ;) Cheers, -- Guido
- Jonas
-- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Quoting Guido Günther (2021-09-27 21:35:12)
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:17:54AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Guido Günther (2021-09-27 09:20:11)
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 07:04:12PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
@Guido: Please remember to post such wisdom to the list.
I sure did, my sender address just was rejected since mutt's sender matching tricked me.
Thanks for unveiling that mystery: I was puzzled that you could ever
I only noticed because i found my own reply in another folder - so multiple errors at play here and i don't even count typos ;)
make mistakes and triple-checked before posting that remark! :-)
How come I feel mocked now ;)
Sorry, unintended: I was genuinely baffled and checked multiple times if I had somehow missed your email at my end. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
participants (4)
-
Carsten Schoenert -
Guido Günther -
Jonas Smedegaard -
Matthias Klumpp