Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 16:12:50 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: Richard Dawe cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, Zippo Workers Subject: Re: DJGPP library DSMs In-Reply-To: <38F07DD1.571F7AE2@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sun, 9 Apr 2000, Richard Dawe wrote: > > 4) I think we need a `current-maintainer' directive and the associated > > `current-maintainer-email', because the current maintainer might be > > someone different from the original author. This is the case with > > many GNU packages. > > Yes, this would be a good idea. Do we need the prefix 'current-' though? > Wouldn't 'maintainer' and 'maintainer-email' do? Yes, current can go away.