Add pointer to debian-experimental-changes@l.d.o, where uploads to experimental are...

[developers-reference.git] / pkgs.dbk

diff --git a/pkgs.dbk b/pkgs.dbk
index 9922576852ab87ce32dadea430b699a5c0ec94fd..93a8871e22292739e953d06fb819d7c3c26d0920 100644 (file)
--- a/pkgs.dbk
+++ b/pkgs.dbk
@@ -843,10 +843,9 @@ fixing them themselves, sending security advisories, and maintaining
 <para>
 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, preferably by filing a ticket in
-their Request Tracker.
-See <ulink url="http://wiki.debian.org/rt.debian.org#Security_Team"></ulink>.
-Alternatively you may email &email-security-team;.
+and promptly contact the security team by emailing &email-security-team;. If
+desired, email can be encrypted with the Debian Security Contact key, see
+<ulink url="https://www.debian.org/security/faq#contact"/> for details.
 <emphasis role="strong">DO NOT UPLOAD</emphasis> any packages for
 <literal>stable</literal> without contacting the team.  Useful information
 includes, for example:
@@ -1153,8 +1152,9 @@ later distributions.  If in doubt, test it with <literal>dpkg
 --compare-versions</literal>.  Be careful not to re-use a version number that
 you have already used for a previous upload, or one that conflicts with a
 binNMU. The convention is to append
-<literal>+</literal><replaceable>codename</replaceable><literal>1</literal>, e.g.
-<literal>1:2.4.3-4+lenny1</literal>, of course increasing 1 for any subsequent
+<literal>+deb</literal><replaceable>X</replaceable><literal>u1</literal> (where
+<replaceable>X</replaceable> is the major release number), e.g.
+<literal>1:2.4.3-4+deb7u1</literal>, of course increasing 1 for any subsequent
 uploads.
 </para>
 </listitem>
@@ -1975,8 +1975,20 @@ Before doing an NMU, consider the following questions:
 <itemizedlist>
 <listitem>
 <para>
-Does your NMU really fix bugs? Fixing cosmetic issues or changing the
-packaging style in NMUs is discouraged.
+Have you geared the NMU towards helping 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
+reviews of the NMU diff.
+</para>
+</listitem>
+<listitem>
+<para>
+Does your NMU really fix bugs? ("Bugs" means any kind of bugs, e.g.
+wishlist bugs for packaging a new upstream version, but care should be
+taken to minimize the impact to the maintainer.) Fixing cosmetic issues
+or changing the packaging style (e.g. switching from cdbs to dh) in NMUs
+is discouraged.
 </para>
 </listitem>
 <listitem>
@@ -2059,7 +2071,7 @@ Other NMUs: 10 days
 
 <para>
 Those delays are only examples. In some cases, such as uploads fixing security
-issues, or fixes for trivial bugs that blocking a transition, it is desirable
+issues, or fixes for trivial bugs that block a transition, it is desirable
 that the fixed package reaches <literal>unstable</literal> sooner.
 </para>