Mention README.source prominently in the context of NMUs, and say not to go against...

diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index c07b49af66a971dfd8803bb61fae3d9098f6ad1d..13cbc8b8a24e5b2423fc2cfdd7686c81766bb37d 100644 (file)
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ developers-reference (3.4.14~~iwj) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
   * Be somewhat less discouraging about NMU changes to packaging style,
     and NMUing new upstream versions.  But, break these imprecations out
     into a separate bullet point to make them clearer.
+  * Mention README.source prominently in the context of NMUs, and say not
+    to go against the wishes of the maintainer.
 
  --
 

diff --git a/pkgs.dbk b/pkgs.dbk
index 53ffb9822a4ac7c78e3e61c5de956dc54347528b..d2f052216e20fd55114f311b325b9791818df9f3 100644 (file)
--- a/pkgs.dbk
+++ b/pkgs.dbk
@@ -1976,7 +1976,12 @@ Before doing an NMU, consider the following questions:
 <itemizedlist>
 <listitem>
 <para>
-Have you geared the NMU towards helping the maintainer? As there might
+Have you geared the NMU towards helping the maintainer?  You should
+pay attention to the maintainer's opinions, as expressed in bug
+reports etc. and particularly in
+<literal>debian/README.source</literal>.  Do not NMU against the
+wishes of the maintainer.
+As there might
 be disagreement on the notion of whether the maintainer actually needs
 help on not, the DELAYED queue exists to give time to the maintainer to
 react and has the beneficial side-effect of allowing for independent