Message93365
> I'm just suggesting to add the meta-data field in order to recreate
> consistency - not advocating that setup() parameter or its use.
Yes but fixing this inconsitency can be done on either side:
A - remove the maintainer and maintainer_email
B - add the Maintainer and Maintainer-email in the metadata
While I understand your PoV about the fact that B/ is not impacting
existing packages and doesn't require any deprecation, I would like to
find some use cases for having such fields in the Metadata, other than
fixing the inconsistency.
If we don't have a use case, I'd go for A/ |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2009-09-30 13:15:50 | tarek | set | recipients:
+ tarek, lemburg, pitrou, techtonik |
2009-09-30 13:15:50 | tarek | set | messageid: <1254316550.16.0.817669715381.issue6992@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2009-09-30 13:15:48 | tarek | link | issue6992 messages |
2009-09-30 13:15:48 | tarek | create | |
|