X-Git-Url: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/ucgi/~ianmdlvl/git?p=developers-reference.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=beyond-pkging.dbk;h=25987fed41c857998ac0f92207fa3a9b1aff4ffc;hp=1562f8f6c87f0f1fdff8bbbec052af16032d834b;hb=8f2b1802ba79cc398b93894ac9b1568d4beafe40;hpb=0e575e5d1a578b7e95761b5fa5d69cc4fb4be10b diff --git a/beyond-pkging.dbk b/beyond-pkging.dbk index 1562f8f..25987fe 100644 --- a/beyond-pkging.dbk +++ b/beyond-pkging.dbk @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ generally ease the process. Make sure the bug is not already filed against a package. Each package has a bug list easily reachable at -http://&bugs-host;/packagename +https://&bugs-host;/packagename. Utilities like querybts 1 can also provide you with this information (and reportbug will usually invoke @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ From time to time you may want to check what has been going on with the bug reports that you submitted. Take this opportunity to close those that you can't reproduce anymore. To find out all the bugs you submitted, you just have to visit -http://&bugs-host;/from:your-email-addr. +https://&bugs-host;/from:your-email-addr.
Reporting lots of bugs at once (mass bug filing) @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ your intention there. To view bugs tagged with a specific usertag, visit -http://&bugs-host;/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=email-addr&tag=tag-name. +https://&bugs-host;/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=email-addr&tag=tag-name.
@@ -346,13 +346,13 @@ the package is maintained. The sponsor downloads (or checkouts) the source package. -The sponsor reviews the source package. If she finds issues, she -informs the maintainer and asks her to provide a fixed version (the +The sponsor reviews the source package. If they find issues, they +inform the maintainer and ask them to provide a fixed version (the process starts over at step 1). -The sponsor could not find any remaining problem. She builds the -package, signs it, and uploads it to Debian. +The sponsor could not find any remaining problem. They build the +package, sign it, and upload it to Debian. @@ -369,15 +369,15 @@ and how large is the user base? How active are the upstream developers? You should also ensure that the prospective maintainer is going -to be a good maintainer. Does she already have some experience with other -packages? If yes, is she doing a good job with them (check out some bugs)? -Is she familiar with the package and its programming language? -Does she have the skills needed for this package? If not, is she able +to be a good maintainer. Do they already have some experience with other +packages? If yes, are they doing a good job with them (check out some bugs)? +Are they familiar with the package and its programming language? +Do they have the skills needed for this package? If not, are they able to learn them? -It's also a good idea to know where she stands towards Debian: does -she agree with Debian's philosophy and does she intend to join Debian? +It's also a good idea to know where they stand with respect to Debian: do +they agree with Debian's philosophy and do they intend to join Debian? Given how easy it is to become a Debian Maintainer, you might want to only sponsor people who plan to join. That way you know from the start that you won't have to act as a sponsor indefinitely. @@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ list of points to check in your review. You can find more checks in the wiki where several developers share their own -sponsorship checklists. +sponsorship checklists. @@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ remove and purge the packages. Maybe test them with piuparts. If the audit did not reveal any problem, you can build the package and upload it to Debian. Remember that even if you're not the maintainer, -the sponsor is still responsible of what he uploaded to Debian. That's +as a sponsor you are still responsible for what you upload to Debian. That's why you're encouraged to keep up with the package through the . @@ -482,7 +482,7 @@ Note that you should not need to modify the source package to put your name in the changelog or in the control file. The Maintainer field of the control file and the changelog should list the person who did the -packaging, i.e. the sponsoree. That way she will get all the BTS mail. +packaging, i.e. the sponsoree. That way they will get all the BTS mail. Instead you should instruct dpkg-buildpackage to use your key for the signature. You do that with the -k option: @@ -539,11 +539,11 @@ linkend="pkg-tracking-system"/>) to verify if the maintainer has not missed something important. Maybe there are translations updates sitting in the BTS that could have been integrated. Maybe the package has been NMUed and the maintainer forgot to integrate the changes from the -NMU in his package. Maybe there's a release critical bug that he has left -unhandled and that's blocking migration to testing. Whatever. If you find -something that she could have done (better), it's time to tell her so that -she can improve for next time, and so that she has a better understanding -of her responsibilities. +NMU into their package. Maybe there's a release critical bug that they have +left unhandled and that's blocking migration to testing. +If you find something that they could have done (better), it's time to tell +them so that they can improve for next time, and so that they have a better +understanding of their responsibilities. If you have found no major problem, upload the new version. Otherwise