Differences between revisions 2 and 3
Revision 2 as of 2006-08-01 09:58:49
Size: 1464
Editor: AdamBarratt
Comment: Stick in some text that should make an ok starting point
Revision 3 as of 2006-08-01 10:09:33
Size: 2015
Editor: AdamBarratt
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
= Package removal requests =

== Do you need to request removal? ==

== Removals from testing, stable and oldstable ==

== Before requesting removal ==



== How to request removal ==

File a bug against the [http://bugs.debian.org/ftp.debian.org ftp.debian.org pseudo-package]. The ftp-masters do not take account of the severity of the bug reported when processing removals, so if you believe the request to be "important" then simply provide appropriate reasoning in the report.

The subject line of the bug report

== Wibble ==

Package removal requests

Do you need to request removal?

Removals from testing, stable and oldstable

Before requesting removal

How to request removal

File a bug against the [http://bugs.debian.org/ftp.debian.org ftp.debian.org pseudo-package]. The ftp-masters do not take account of the severity of the bug reported when processing removals, so if you believe the request to be "important" then simply provide appropriate reasoning in the report.

The subject line of the bug report

Wibble

> is there a comprehensive list of how to title requests against > ftp.debian.org? Perhaps we could make one on wiki.debian.org

It's one of those things that nobody seems to have found the appropriate tuits for. I think about doing it every so often but then get distracted; Jeroen has talked about documenting the format in the past (hence the Cc). I'm also not entirely sure whether such documentation belongs somewhere more "official" (e.g. 5.9.2 of the Developer's Reference) as there's more information that should probably be written down somewhere relating to removals - e.g. "if the package is still listed in debian/control then you'll just get the bug reassigned to the package, requesting that gets fixed first".

Likewise, the ?DevRef section might want to expand on the comments on "testing" removal (as there's no point asking ftpmaster for such removals) and a mention of "rene" so that maintainers know they don't need to request removals for source packages no longer building any binaries, etc.

The syntax is basically

  • RM: <source package> <architecture> -- <reasons>

where:

  • <architecture> is of the form "[arch(| arch)*]" and should be omitted

unless

  • you're requesting a partial removal (i.e. only removing the binaries for

some

  • architectures, as in this case)

and

Adam