Uploading to stable means that the package will be placed into the
-
Extra care should be taken when uploading to stable. Basically, a @@ -1459,13 +1554,29 @@ packages (by messing with Provides or shlibs files), possibly making those other packages uninstallable, is strongly discouraged.
The Release Team (which can be reached at &email-debian-release;) will
-regularly evaluate the uploads in proposed-updates and decide if
+regularly evaluate the uploads in stable-proposed-updates and decide if
your package can be included in stable. Please be clear (and
verbose, if necessary) in your changelog entries for uploads to
stable, because otherwise the package won't be considered for
inclusion.
-
+
+The testing distribution is fed with packages from unstable according to the rules
+explained in . However, the release manager may stop the testing
+scripts when he wants to freeze the distribution. In that case, you may want to
+upload to testing-proposed-updates to provide fixed packages during the freeze.
+
+Keep in mind that packages uploaded there are not automatically processed, they
+have to go through the hands of the release manager. So you'd better have a good
+reason to upload there. In order to know what a good reason is in the
+release manager's eyes, you should read the instructions that he regularly
+gives on &email-debian-devel-announce;.
+
+You should not upload to testing-proposed-updates when you can update your
+packages through unstable. If you can't (for example because you have a
+newer development version in unstable), you may use it but it is recommended to ask
+the authorization of the release manager before.
As discussed above, export controlled software should not be uploaded
to ftp-master. Instead, upload the package to
-When a security bug is detected, a fixed package should be uploaded
-as soon as possible. In this case, the Debian security officers get in
-contact with the package maintainer to make sure a fixed package is
-uploaded within a reasonable time (less than 48 hours). If the package
-maintainer cannot provide a fixed package fast enough or if he/she
-cannot be reached in time, a security officer may upload a fixed
-package (i.e., do a source NMU).
+When a security bug is detected, the security team may do an NMU.
+Please refer to for more information.
During the release cycle (see ), NMUs which fix
serious or higher severity bugs are encouraged and accepted. Even
during this window, however, you should endeavor to reach the current
maintainer of the package; they might be just about to upload a fix
for the problem. As with any source NMU, the guidelines found in need to be followed.
+id="nmu-guidelines"> need to be followed. Special exceptions are made
+for .
-Bug fixes to unstable by non-maintainers are also acceptable, but only
-as a last resort or with permission. The following protocol should
-be respected to do an NMU :
+Uploading bug fixes to unstable by non-maintainers should only be done
+by following this protocol:
+At times, the release manager or an organized group of developers can
+announce a certain period of time in which the NMU rules are relaxed.
+This usually involves shortening the period during which one is to wait
+before uploading the fixes, and shortening the DELAYED period. It is
+important to notice that even in these so-called "bug squashing party"
+times, the NMU'er has to file bugs and contact the developer first,
+and act later.
@@ -1844,11 +1959,7 @@ absolutely necessary for someone other than the usual maintainer to
make a release based on a new upstream version then the person making
the release should start with the debian-revision value
`0.1'. The usual maintainer of a package should start their
-debian-revision numbering at `1'. Note that if you do
-this, you'll have to invoke
-If one of your packages has been NMUed, you have to incorporate the
+If one of your packages has been NMU'ed, you have to incorporate the
changes in your copy of the sources. This is easy, you just have
to apply the patch that has been sent to you. Once this is done, you
have to close the bugs that have been tagged fixed by the NMU. You
@@ -1931,10 +2042,10 @@ BTS or by adding the required closes: #nnnn in the changelog
entry of your next upload.
In any case, you should not be upset by the NMU. An NMU is not a
-personal attack against the maintainer. It is just the proof that
-someone cares enough about the package and was willing to help
-you in your work. You should be thankful to him and you may want to
-ask him if he would be interested to help you on a more frequent
+personal attack against the maintainer. It is a proof that
+someone cares enough about the package and that they were willing to help
+you in your work, so you should be thankful. You may also want to
+ask them if they would be interested to help you on a more frequent
basis as co-maintainer or backup maintainer
(see ).
@@ -1985,7 +2096,9 @@ environment. Within that chrooted environment, install the
See the
-&FIXME; Speak about Uploaders: field, about the intelligent use
-of the PTS. Insist that it's a "must have" for base and standard
-packages.
-
+
+"Collaborative maintenance" is a term describing the sharing of Debian
+package maintenance duties by several people. This collaboration is
+almost always a good idea, since it generally results in higher quality and
+faster bug fix turnaround time. It is strongly recommended that
+packages in which a priority of Standard or which are part of
+the base set have co-maintainers.
+Generally there is a primary maintainer and one or more
+co-maintainers. The primary maintainer is the whose name is listed in
+the Maintainer field of the
+In its most basic form, the process of adding a new co-maintainer is
+quite easy:
+Setup the co-maintainer with access to the sources you build the
+package from. Generally this implies you are using a network-capable
+version control system, such as
+Add the co-maintainer's correct maintainer name and address to the
+Uploaders field in the global part of the
+
+Using the PTS (), the co-maintainers
+should subscribe themselves to the appropriate source package.
+At other times, you may make a mistake in constructing your package and
+wish to replace it. The only way to do this is to increase the version
+number and upload a new version. The old version will be expired in
+the usual manner. Note that this applies to each part of your package,
+including the sources: if you wish to replace the upstream source tarball
+of your package, you will need to upload it with a different version. An
+easy possibility is to replace
@@ -2326,8 +2485,8 @@ automatically once you upload a new version with an updated
Maintainer: field, although it can take a few hours after the
upload is done. If you do not expect to upload a new version for a while,
you can use to get the bug reports. However,
-make sure that the old maintainer is not embarassed by the fact that
-he will continue to receive the bugs during that time.
+make sure that the old maintainer has no problem with the fact that
+they will continue to receive the bugs during that time.
+Once you've dealt with a bug report (e.g. fixed it), mark it as
+done (close it) by sending an explanation message to
+
You should never close bugs via the bug server close
command sent to &email-bts-control;. If you do so, the original
submitter will not receive any information about why the bug was
@@ -2382,19 +2547,313 @@ closed.
As a package maintainer, you will often find bugs in other packages or
have bugs reported against your packages which are actually bugs in
-other packages. The
Filing bugs for problems that you find in other packages is one of
the "civic obligations" of maintainership, see
-for details.
+for details. However, handling the bugs in your own packages is
+even more important.
+
+Here's a list of steps that you may follow to handle a bug report:
+
+If the bug submitter disagree with your decision to close the bug,
+they may reopen it until you find an agreement on how to handle it.
+If you don't find any, you may want to tag the bug wontfix
+to let people know that the bug exists but that it won't be corrected.
+If this situation is unacceptable, you (or the submitter) may want to
+require a decision of the technical committee by reassigning the bug
+to
+Sometimes you also have to adjust the severity of the bug so that it
+matches our definition of the severity. That's because people tend to
+inflate the severity of bugs to make sure their bugs are fixed quickly.
+Some bugs may even be dropped to wishlist severity when the requested
+change is just cosmetic.
+
-&FIXME;Talk about tags, forwarding bugs, or else break it into
-different sections...
+Due to their sensitive nature, security-related bugs must be handled
+carefully. The Debian Security Team exists to coordinate this
+activity, keeping track of outstanding security problems, helping
+maintainers with security problems or fix them themselves, sending
+security advisories, and maintaining security.debian.org.
+
+
+
+
+
+When you become aware of a security-related bug in a Debian package,
+whether or not you are the maintainer, collect pertinent information
+about the problem, and promptly contact the security team at
+&email-security-team;.
+Useful information includes, for example:
+
+
+Unlike most other activities within Debian, information about security
+issues must sometimes be kept private for a time. Whether this is the
+case depends on the nature of the problem and corresponding fix, and
+whether it is already a matter of public knowledge.
+
+There are a few ways a developer can learn of a security problem:
+
+
+ In all cases if the person who reports the problem asks to not
+ disclose the information that should be respected, with the obvious
+ exception of informing the security team (make sure you tell the
+ security team that the information can not be disclosed).
+
+
+Please note that if secrecy is needed you can also not upload a fix to
+unstable (or anywhere else), since the changelog and diff information
+for unstable is public.
+
+
+There are two reasons for releasing information even though secrecy is
+requested: the problem has been known for a while, or that the problem
+or exploit has become public.
+
+
+Security advisories are only issued for the current, released stable
+distribution, not for testing or unstable. When released, advisories
+are sent to the &email-debian-security-announce;
+mailing list and posted on
+One way that you can assist the security team in their duties is to
+provide fixed packages suitable for a security advisory for the stable
+Debian release.
+
+ When an update is made to the stable release, care must be taken to
+ avoid changing system behavior or introducing new bugs. In order to
+ do this, make as few changes as possible to fix the bug. Users and
+ administrators rely on the exact behavior of a release once it is
+ made, so any change that is made might break someone's system.
+ This is especially true of libraries: make sure you never change the
+ API or ABI, no matter how small the change.
+
+This means that moving to a new upstream version is not a good
+solution. Instead, the relevant changes should be back-ported to the
+version present in the current stable Debian release. Generally,
+upstream maintainers are willing to help if needed. If not, the
+Debian security team may be able to help.
+
+In some cases, it is not possible to back-port a security fix, for
+example when large amounts of source code need to be modified or
+rewritten. If this happens, it may be necessary to move to a new
+upstream version. However, you must always coordinate that with the
+security team beforehand.
+
+Related to this is another important guideline: always test your
+changes. If you have an exploit available, try it and see if it
+indeed succeeds on the unpatched package and fails on the fixed
+package. Test other, normal actions as well, as sometimes a security
+fix can break seemingly unrelated features in subtle ways.
+
+Review and test your changes as much as possible. Check the
+differences from the previous version repeatedly
+(
+DO NOT upload a package to the security upload queue without
+prior authorization from the security team. If the package does not
+exactly meet the team's requirements, it will cause many problems and
+delays in dealing with the unwanted upload.
+
+DO NOT upload your fix to proposed-updates without
+coordinating with the security team. Packages from
+security.debian.org will be copied into the proposed-updates directory
+automatically. If a package with the same or a higher version number
+is already installed into the archive, the security update will be
+rejected by the archive system. That way, the stable distribution
+will end up without a security update for this package instead.
+
+Once you have created and tested the new package and it has been
+approved by the security team, it needs to be uploaded so that it can
+be installed in the archives. For security uploads, the place to
+upload to is
+ftp://security.debian.org/pub/SecurityUploadQueue/ .
+
+
+Once an upload to the security queue has been accepted, the package
+will automatically be rebuilt for all architectures and stored for
+verification by the security team.
+
+
+Uploads which are waiting for acceptance or verification are only
+accessible by the security team. This is necessary since there might
+be fixes for security problems that cannot be disclosed yet.
+
+
+If a member of the security team accepts a package, it will be
+installed on security.debian.org as well as the proper
+distribution-proposed-updates on ftp-master or in the non-US
+archive.
@@ -2405,10 +2864,11 @@ been accepted into the Debian archive. Therefore, once you get
notification that your updated package has been installed into the
archive, you can and should close the bug in the BTS.
-If you are using a new version of
-If you want to close bugs the old fashioned, manual way, it is usually
-sufficient to mail the
+Bear in mind that it is not obligatory to close bugs using the changelog
+like described above -- if you simply want to close bugs that don't have
+anything to do with an upload of yours, do it simply by emailing an
+explanation to
-You should periodically get the new
+To help you in your packaging effort, you can use helper scripts.
+The best scripts available are provided by
+debhelper is very useful because it lets you follow the latest Debian policy
+without doing many modifications since the changes that can be automated are
+almost always automatically done by a debhelper script. Furthermore it
+offers enough flexibility to be able to use it in conjunction with
+some hand crafted shell invocations within the
+You can however decide to not use any helper script and still write
+excellent
+Big packages tend to have many upstream bugs that you want to fix within
+the Debian package. If you just correct the bug in the source, all the
+fixes are directly integrated in the
+The good solution is to keep separate patches within the
+
+Additionally, dbs provides facilities to create the patches and to keep
+track of what they are for.
+
+
+A single source package will often build several binary packages, either
+to provide several flavors of the same software (examples are the
+vim-* packages) or to make several small packages instead of a big one
+(it's interesting if the user doesn't need all the packages and can thus
+save some disk space).
+
+The second case can be easily managed by
+The first case is a bit more difficult since it involves multiple recompiles
+of the same software but with different configure options. The
+
+Like porters, translators have a difficult task. They work on many
+packages and must collaborate with many different
+maintainers. Moreover, most of the time, they are not native English
+speaker, so you may need to be particularly patient with them.
+
+The goal of
+Using
+Some very good packaging practices for packages using
+
+Libraries are always difficult to package for various reasons. The policy
+imposes many constraints to ease their maintenance and to make sure
+upgrades are as simple as possible when a new upstream version comes out.
+A breakage in a library can result in dozens of dependent packages
+breaking.
+
+Good practices for library packaging have been grouped in
+
+Several subsets of packages have special sub-policies and corresponding
+packaging rules and practices:
+
+
+Debconf is a great tool but it is often poorly used. Many common mistakes
+are listed in the
The description of the package (as defined by the corresponding field
in the
For example, apart from the usual description that you adapt from the
upstream
+For consistency and for an aesthetic concern, you should capitalize the
+first letter of the description.
+
Last but not least, since the first user impression is based on
-that description, you should be careful to avoid english
+that description, you should be careful to avoid English
mistakes. Ensure that you spell check it.
-
As a volunteer organization, Debian relies on the discretion of its
-members in choosing what they want to work on, and choosing what is
+members in choosing what they want to work on and in choosing
the most critical thing to spend their time on.
Reporting a great number of bugs for the same problem on a great
-number of different packages &mdash i.e., more than 10 &mdash is a deprecated
+number of different packages — i.e., more than 10 — is a deprecated
practice. Take all possible steps to avoid submitting bulk bugs at
all. For instance, if checking for the problem can be automated, add
a new check to
Even though there is a dedicated group of people for Quality
Assurance, QA duties are not reserved solely for them. You can
participate in this effort by keeping your packages as bug-free as
-possible, and as lintian-clean (see ) as
+possible, and as lintian-clean (see ) as
possible. If you do not find that possible, then you should consider
orphaning some of your packages (see ). Alternatively, you may ask the help of other people
in order to catch up the backlog of bugs that you have (you can ask
-for help on &email-debian-qa; or &email-debian-devel;).
+for help on &email-debian-qa; or &email-debian-devel;). At the same
+time, you can look for co-maintainers (see ).
+
+
+From time to time the QA group organizes bug squashing parties to get rid of
+as many problems as possible. They are announced on &email-debian-devel-announce;
+and the announce explains what area will be focused on during the party:
+usually they focus on release critical bugs but it may happen that they
+decide to help finish a major upgrade going on (like a new perl version
+which requires recompilation of all the binary modules).
+
+The rules for non-maintainer uploads differ during the parties because
+the announce of the party is considered like a prior notice for NMU. If
+you have packages that may be affected by the party (because they have
+release critical bugs for example), you should send an update to each of
+the corresponding bug to explain their current status and what you expect
+from the party. If you don't want an NMU, or if you're only interested in a
+patch, or if you will deal yourself with the bug, please explain that in
+the BTS.
+
+People participating in the party have special rules for NMU, they can
+NMU without prior notice if they upload their NMU to
+DELAYED/3-day at least. All other NMU rules applies as usually, they
+should send the patch of the NMU in the BTS (in one of the open bugs
+fixed by the NMU or in a new bug tagged fixed). They should
+also respect the maintainer's wishes if he expressed some.
+
+If someone doesn't feel confident with an NMU, he should just send a patch
+to the BTS. It's far better than a broken NMU.
@@ -2566,8 +3253,8 @@ If you do not get a reply after a few weeks you should collect all
useful information about this maintainer. Start by logging into
the
Send all this information to &email-debian-qa;, in order to let the
QA people do whatever is needed.
@@ -2587,7 +3274,7 @@ email the maintainer, whatever their individual email address (or
addresses) may be. Replace <package> with the name of
a source or a binary package.
-You may also be interested by contacting the persons who are
+You may also be interested in contacting the persons who are
subscribed to a given source package via .
You can do so by using the <package-name>@&pts-host;
email address.
@@ -2615,7 +3302,7 @@ id="&url-sponsors;">.
New maintainers usually have certain difficulties creating Debian packages
— this is quite understandable. That is why the sponsor is there, to check
the package and verify that it is good enough for inclusion in Debian.
-(Note that if the sponsored package is new, the FTP admins will also have to
+(Note that if the sponsored package is new, the ftpmasters will also have to
inspect it before letting it in.)
Sponsoring merely by signing the upload or just recompiling is
@@ -2635,12 +3322,12 @@ the package meets minimum Debian standards. That implies that you
must build and test the package on your own system before uploading.
You can not simply upload a binary
Do not be afraid to write the sponsoree back and point out changes
that need to be made. It often takes several rounds of back-and-forth
@@ -2649,7 +3336,7 @@ means being a mentor.
Once the package meets Debian standards, build the package with
The Maintainer field of the
+You should periodically get the newest
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ In the first two cases, the information is public and it is important
+ to have a fix as soon as possible. In the last case, however, it
+ might not be public information. In that case there are a few
+ possible options for dealing with the problem:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+