Maintainer/XSBC-Original-Maintainer in Ubuntu packages

Luca Falavigna dktrkranz at
Sun Jun 14 22:29:22 BST 2009

Il giorno Sun, 14 Jun 2009 20:21:21 +0200
Morten Kjeldgaard <mok at> ha scritto:
> There will still be two fields, one for MOTU and one for the
> packager, exactly like now, only the packager's field would not be
> his/her private email, but a link to their Launchpad account. PLUS
> the packager would automatiically be subscribed to bugmail of the
> package.

I recently received some e-mail communications for a package I maintain
in Ubuntu, I really think e-mail field is the quickest method to get in
touch with a packager, and the last resort in case everything failed.

You mentioned LP matches a given e-mail address with a given LP ID,
it's quite easy because e-mails are stored in LP personal profiles.

I suggest this approach (if technically possible, of course):
* packagers use their e-mail address as usual
* when processing NEW packages (excluding the ones from Debian, just
  consider our local Ubuntu packages), matched LP ID becomes bug
  contact immediately (there's no need for the package to leave NEW to
  become a bug contact). lp-liason will have to prioritize this, though.
* if e-mail address is not registered, do nothing. This is difficult
  these days because REVU uses LP OpenID to authenticate.

This way we will achieve:
* public e-mail address to contact in case of troubles
* automatic bug contact for packager
* no need to hack around package archive tools

> So IF there is an Ubuntu member who wants to care for a package, I  
> don't see why it should be forbidden. Perhaps that could be
> signalled with an XSBC-Ubuntu-Maintainer: field like you suggest, but
> it is another discussion than this one (which basically only is that  
> packagers have to put their Launchpad-Id in debian/control rather
> than their private email address).

Become a maintainer for Ubuntu local packages (as much as a Debian one,
with a particular interest in making changes) should not be forbidden,
of course. What I wanted to say is we should provide someone to be
responsible for a package in case packager becomes MIA. Setting
maintainer to be MOTU team (or whatever when ArchiveReorganization
takes place) is a guarantee of quality over time.

 . ''`.      Luca Falavigna
 : :'  :  Ubuntu MOTU Developer
 `. `'`     Debian Maintainer
   `-      GPG Key: 0x86BC2A50
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the Ubuntu-motu mailing list