<!-- common, language independant entities -->
<!entity % commondata SYSTEM "common.ent" > %commondata;
<!-- CVS revision of this document -->
- <!entity cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.47 $">
+ <!entity cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.63 $">
<!-- if you are translating this document, please notate the RCS
revision of the developers reference here -->
<author>Adam Di Carlo, current maintainer <email>aph@debian.org</email>
<author>Christian Schwarz <email>schwarz@debian.org</email>
<author>Ian Jackson <email>ijackson@gnu.ai.mit.edu</email>
- <version>ver. &version;, &date;
+ <version>ver. &version;, &date-en;
<copyright>
<copyrightsummary>
-copyright ©1998, 1999 Adam Di Carlo</copyrightsummary>
+copyright ©1998 &ndash 2001 Adam Di Carlo</copyrightsummary>
<copyrightsummary>
copyright ©1997, 1998 Christian Schwarz</copyrightsummary>
<p>
their packages (<ref id="tools">).
<p>
It should be clear that this reference does not discuss the technical
-details of the Debian package nor how to generate Debian packages;
-that information is discussed in the <url id="&url-pkg-manual;"
-name="Debian Packaging Manual">. Nor does this reference detail the
-standards to which Debian software must comply; that information can
-be found in the <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy
-Manual">.
+details of the Debian package nor how to generate Debian packages.
+Nor does this reference detail the standards to which Debian software
+must comply. All of such information can be found in the <url
+id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy Manual">.
<p>
Furthermore, this document is <em>not an expression of formal
-policy</em>. It contains documentation for the Debian system, and
-generally agreed-upon best practices.
+policy</em>. It contains documentation for the Debian system and
+generally agreed-upon best practices. Thus, it is what is called a
+``normative'' document.
<chapt id="new-maintainer">Applying to Become a Maintainer
<sect id="upstream-coordination">Coordination With Upstream Developers
<p>
A big part of your job as Debian maintainer will be to stay in contact
-with the upstream developers since you'll have to share information that
-you get from the Bug Tracking System. It's not your job to fix non-Debian
-specific bugs.
-Rather, you have to forward these bugs to the upstream developers.
-(Of course, if you are able to do so, you may certainly fix them...)
-This way, the bug will hopefully
-be corrected when the next upstream version comes out.
+with the upstream developers. Debian users will sometimes report bugs
+to the Bug Tracking System that are not specific to Debian. You
+must forward these bug reports to the upstream developers so that
+they can be fixed in a future release. It's not your job to fix
+non-Debian specific bugs. However, if you are able to do so, you are
+encouraged to contribute to upstream development of the package by
+providing a fix for the bug. Debian users and developers will often
+submit patches to fix upstream bugs, and you should evaluate and
+forward these patches upstream.
<p>
-From time to
-time, you may get a patch attached to a bug report. You have to send the
-patch upstream and make sure that it gets included (if the authors accept
-the proposed fix). If you need to modify the upstream sources in order to
-build a policy conformant package, then you should propose a nice fix
-to the upstream developers which can be included there, so that you won't have to
+If you need to modify the upstream sources in order to build a policy
+conformant package, then you should propose a nice fix to the upstream
+developers which can be included there, so that you won't have to
modify the sources of the next upstream version. Whatever changes you
need, always try not to fork from the upstream sources.
following those bugs and try to help you each time they can. But if
you can't fix such bugs within 2 weeks, you should either ask for help
by sending a mail to the Quality Assurance (QA) group
-(&email-debian-qa;) or justify yourself and present your plan to fix
+&email-debian-qa;, or justify yourself and present your plan to fix
it by sending a mail to the bug concerned report. Otherwise people
from the QA group may want to do a Non-Maintainer Upload (see
<ref id="nmu">) after trying to contact you (they might not wait as long as
server. For instance, at the mirror site,
<ftpsite>ftp.us.debian.org</ftpsite>, the Debian archive itself is
contained in <ftppath>/debian</ftppath>, which is a common location
-(another is <ftppath>/pub/debian</ftppath>).
+(another is <tt>/pub/debian</tt>).
<p>
A distribution is comprised of Debian source and binary packages, and the
respective <tt>Sources</tt> and <tt>Packages</tt> index files, containing
Every released Debian distribution has a <em>code name</em>: Debian
1.1 is called `buzz'; Debian 1.2, `rex'; Debian 1.3, `bo'; Debian 2.0,
`hamm'; Debian 2.1, `slink'; and Debian 2.2, `potato'. There is also
-a ``pseudo-distribution'', called `sid', which is contains packages for
-architectures which are not yet officially supported or released by
-Debian. These architectures are planned to be integrated into the
-mainstream distribution at some future date.
+a ``pseudo-distribution'', called `sid', which is the current
+`unstable' distribution; since packages are moved from `unstable' to
+`testing' as they approach stability, `sid' itself is never released.
+As well as the usual contents of a Debian distribution, `sid' contains
+packages for architectures which are not yet officially supported or
+released by Debian. These architectures are planned to be integrated
+into the mainstream distribution at some future date.
<p>
Since Debian has an open development model (i.e., everyone can
-participate and follow the development) even the unstable distribution
-is distributed to the Internet through the Debian FTP and HTTP server
-network. Thus, if we had called the directory which contains the
-development version `unstable', then we would have to rename it to
-`stable' when the version is released, which would cause all FTP
-mirrors to re-retrieve the whole distribution (which is quite
-large).
+participate and follow the development) even the `unstable' and `testing'
+distributions are distributed to the Internet through the Debian FTP and
+HTTP server network. Thus, if we had called the directory which contains
+the release candidate version `testing', then we would have to rename it
+to `stable' when the version is released, which would cause all FTP
+mirrors to re-retrieve the whole distribution (which is quite large).
<p>
On the other hand, if we called the distribution directories
<em>Debian-x.y</em> from the beginning, people would think that Debian
more information.
<p>
Assuming no one else is already working on your prospective package,
-you must then submit a short bug (<ref id="submit-bug">) against the
-pseudo package <tt>wnpp</tt> and send a copy to &email-debian-devel;
+you must then submit a bug report (<ref id="submit-bug">) against the
+pseudo package <tt>wnpp</tt>
describing your plan to create a new package, including, but not
limiting yourself to, a description of the package, the license of the
prospective package and the current URL where it can be downloaded
-from. You should set the subject of the bug to ``ITP: <var>foo</var>
+from.
+ <p>
+You should set the subject of the bug to ``ITP: <var>foo</var>
-- <var>short description</var>'', substituting the name of the new
-package for <var>foo</var>. The severity of the bug report must be
-set to <em>wishlist</em>. Please include a <tt>Closes:
-bug#<var>nnnnn</var></tt> entry on the changelog of the new package in
-order for the bug report to be automatically closed once the new
-package is installed on the archive (<ref id="upload-bugfix">).
+package for <var>foo</var>. The severity of the bug report must be set
+to <em>wishlist</em>. If you feel it's necessary, send a copy to
+&email-debian-devel; by putting the address in the X-Debbugs-CC: header
+of the message (no, don't use CC:, because that way the message's subject
+won't indicate the bug number).
+ <p>
+Please include a <tt>Closes: bug#<var>nnnnn</var></tt> entry on the
+changelog of the new package in order for the bug report to be
+automatically closed once the new package is installed on the archive
+(<ref id="upload-bugfix">).
<p>
There are a number of reasons why we ask maintainers to announce their
intentions:
&control-file-fields;
<p>
All of these fields are mandatory for a Debian upload. See the list
-of control fields in the <url id="&url-pkg-manual;" name="Debian
-Packaging Manual"> for the contents of these fields. You can close
-bugs automatically using the <tt>Description</tt> field, see <ref
+of control fields in the <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian
+Policy Manual"> for the contents of these fields. You can close bugs
+automatically using the <tt>Description</tt> field, see <ref
id="upload-bugfix">. Only the <tt>Distribution</tt> field is
discussed in this section, since it relates to the archive maintenance
policies.
To upload a package, you need a personal account on
<ftpsite>ftp-master.debian.org</ftpsite>, which you should have as an
official maintainer. If you use <prgn>scp</prgn> or <prgn>rsync</prgn>
-to transfer the files, place them into <ftppath>&us-upload-dir;</ftppath>;
+to transfer the files, place them into <tt>&us-upload-dir;</tt>;
if you use anonymous FTP to upload, place them into
<ftppath>/pub/UploadQueue/</ftppath>.
<p>
software will process it by running <prgn>dinstall</prgn> on your changes
file: <example>dinstall -n foo.changes</example>
- <sect1 id="upload-non-us">Uploading to <tt>non-us</tt> (pandora)
+ <sect1 id="upload-non-us">Uploading to <tt>non-US</tt> (pandora)
<p>
As discussed above, export controlled software should not be uploaded
-to <tt>ftp-master</tt>. Instead, use <prgn>scp</prgn> or non-anonymous
-FTP to copy the package to <ftpsite>non-us.debian.org</ftpsite>, placing
-the files in <ftppath>&non-us-upload-dir;</ftppath>. By default, you can
+to <tt>ftp-master</tt>. Instead, use <prgn>scp</prgn> or <prgn>rsync</prgn>
+to copy the package to <ftpsite>non-us.debian.org</ftpsite>, placing
+the files in <tt>&non-us-upload-dir;</tt>. By default, you can
use the same account/password that works on <tt>ftp-master</tt>.
+If you use anonymous FTP to upload, place the files into
+<ftppath>/pub/UploadQueue/</ftppath>.
<p>
The program <prgn>dupload</prgn> comes with support for uploading to
<tt>non-us</tt>; please refer to the documentation that comes with
You can check your upload the same way it's done on <tt>ftp-master</tt>,
with:
<example>dinstall -n foo.changes</example>
-
+ <p>
+Note that U.S. residents or citizens are subject to restrictions on
+export of cryptographic software. As of this writing, U.S. citizens are
+allowed to export some cryptographic software, subject to notification
+rules by the U.S. Department of Commerce.
+ <p>
+Debian policy does not prevent upload to non-US by U.S. residents or
+citizens, but care should be taken in doing so. It is recommended that
+developers take all necessary steps to ensure that they are not
+breaking current US law by doing an upload to non-US, <em>including
+consulting a lawyer</em>.
+ <p>
+For packages in non-US main or contrib, developers should at least
+follow the <url id="&url-u.s.-export;" name="procedure outlined by the
+US Government">. Maintainers of non-US/non-free packages should
+further consult these <url id="&url-notification-of-export;"
+name="rules on notification of export"> of non-free software.
+ <p>
+This section is for information only and does not constitute legal
+advice. Again, it is strongly recommended that U.S. citizens and
+residents consult a lawyer before doing uploads to non-US.
+
+
<sect1>Uploads via <tt>chiark</tt>
<p>
If you have a slow network connection to <tt>ftp-master</tt>, there are
<item>
Don't set architecture to a value other than ``all'' or ``any'' unless
you really mean it. In too many cases, maintainers don't follow the
-instructions in the <url id="&url-pkg-manual;" name="Debian Packaging
+instructions in the <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy
Manual">. Setting your architecture to ``i386'' is usually incorrect.
<item>
Make sure your source package is correct. Do <tt>dpkg-source -x
``foo_1.3-1.0.1''.
<p>
The way to invoke <prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn> is as
-<tt>dpkg-buildpackage -B -m<var>porter-email</var></tt>. Of course,
+<tt>dpkg-buildpackage -B -e<var>porter-email</var></tt>. Of course,
set <var>porter-email</var> to your email address. This will do a
binary-only build of only the architecture-dependant portions of the
package, using the `binary-arch' target in <file>debian/rules</file>.
<p>
If you need to change the section for one of your packages, change the
package control information to place the package in the desired
-section, and re-upload the package (see the <url id="&url-pkg-manual;"
-name="Debian Packaging Manual"> for details). Carefully examine the
+section, and re-upload the package (see the <url id="&url-debian-policy;"
+name="Debian Policy Manual"> for details). Carefully examine the
installation log sent to you when the package is installed into the
archive. If for some reason the old location of the package remains,
file a bug against <tt>ftp.debian.org</tt> asking that the old
Sometimes you made a mistake naming the package and you need to rename
it. In this case, you need to follow a two-step process. First, set
your <file>debian/control</file> file to replace and conflict with the
-obsolete name of the package (see the <url id="&url-pkg-manual;"
-name="Debian Packaging Manual"> for details). Once you've uploaded
+obsolete name of the package (see the <url id="&url-debian-policy;"
+name="Debian Policy Manual"> for details). Once you've uploaded
that package, and the package has moved into the archive, file a bug
against <tt>ftp.debian.org</tt> asking to remove the package with the
obsolete name.
If you can no longer maintain a package, you need to inform the others
about that, and see that the package is marked as orphaned.
you should set the package maintainer to <tt>Debian QA Group
-<debian-qa@lists.debian.org></tt> and submit a bug report
-against the pseudo package <tt>wnpp</tt>. The bug report should be
+&orphan-address;</tt> and submit a bug report
+against the pseudo package <package>wnpp</package>. The bug report should be
titled <tt>O: <var>package</var> -- <var>short description</var></tt>
indicating that the package is now orphaned. The severity of the bug
-should be set to <em>normal</em>. If the package is especially
-crucial to Debian, you should instead submit a bug against
-<tt>wnpp</tt> and title it <tt>RFA: <var>package</var> -- <var>short
-description</var></tt> and set its severity to <em>important</em>. You
-should also email &email-debian-devel; asking for a new maintainer.
+should be set to <em>normal</em>. If you feel it's necessary, send a copy
+to &email-debian-devel; by putting the address in the X-Debbugs-CC: header
+of the message (no, don't use CC:, because that way the message's subject
+won't indicate the bug number).
+ <p>
+If the package is especially crucial to Debian, you should instead submit
+a bug against <tt>wnpp</tt> and title it <tt>RFA: <var>package</var> --
+<var>short description</var></tt> and set its severity to
+<em>important</em>. Definitely copy the message to debian-devel in this
+case, as described above.
<p>
Read instructions on the <url id="&url-wnpp;" name="WNPP web pages">
for more information.
-
<chapt id="bug-handling">Handling Bugs
<sect>Monitoring bugs
list.
+ <chapt id="newmaint">
+ <heading>Interaction with Prospective Developers</heading>
+
+ <p>
+This chapter describes procedures that existing Debian developers should
+follow when it comes to dealing with wannabe developers.
+
+ <sect>Sponsoring packages
+ <p>
+Sponsoring a package means uploading a package for a maintainer who is not
+able to do it on their own, a new maintainer applicant. Sponsoring a package
+also means accepting responsibility for it.
+ <p>
+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
+inspect it before letting it in.)
+ <p>
+Sponsoring merely by signing the upload or just recompiling is
+<strong>definitely not recommended</strong>. You need to build the source
+package just like you would build a package of your own. Remember that it
+doesn't matter that you left the prospective developer's name both in the
+changelog and the control file, the upload can still be traced to you.
+ <p>
+If you are an application manager for a prospective developer, you can also
+be their sponsor. That way you can also verify the how the applicant is
+handling the `Tasks and Skills' part of their application.
+
+ <sect>Advocating new developers
+ <p>
+See the page about <url id="&url-newmaint-advocate;"
+name="advocating a prospective developer"> at the Debian web site.
+
+ <sect>Handling new maintainer applications
+ <p>
+Please see <url id="&url-newmaint-amchecklist;" name="Checklist for
+Application Managers"> at the Debian web site.
+
+
+
<chapt id="tools">Overview of Debian Maintainer Tools
<p>
This section contains a rough overview of the tools available to
id="upload-checking"> and <ref id="lintian-reports">.
+ <sect id="debconf">
+ <heading><package>debconf</package></heading>
+ <p>
+<package>debconf</package> provides a consistent interface to
+configuring packages interactively. It is user interface
+intedependant, allowing end-users to configure packages with a
+text-only interface, an HTML interface, or a dialog interface. New
+interfaces can be added modularly.
+ <p>
+Many feel that this system should be used for all packages requiring
+interactive configuration. <package>debconf</package> is not
+currently required by Debian Policy, however, that may change in the
+future.
+
+
<sect id="debhelper">
<heading><package>debhelper</package>
<p>
~ianmdlvl / developers-reference.git / blobdiff