Comment 4 for bug 684275

The procedure in http://wiki.debian.org/DpkgConffileHandling applies only to packages that remove or rename an existing conffile. This package does neither. I can see no way of integrating a conffile removal or rename operation into this package.

The removal-on-purge of the configuration file in the postrm maintainer script is performed structly in accordance with the Policy Manual, section 10.7.3 (http://people.canonical.com/~cjwatson/ubuntu-policy/policy.html/ch-files.html#s10.7.3), which is as follows.

"The other way to do it is via the maintainer scripts. In this case, the configuration file must not be listed as a conffile and must not be part of the package distribution. If the existence of a file is required for the package to be sensibly configured it is the responsibility of the package maintainer to provide maintainer scripts which correctly create, update and maintain the file and remove it on purge. (See Package maintainer scripts and installation procedure, Chapter 6 for more information.) These scripts must be idempotent (i.e., must work correctly if dpkg needs to re-run them due to errors during installation or removal), must cope with all the variety of ways dpkg can call maintainer scripts, must not overwrite or otherwise mangle the user's configuration without asking, must not ask unnecessary questions (particularly during upgrades), and must otherwise be good citizens. "

The reasons for choosing the non-conffile method of configuration file packaging are outlined in Appendinx E of the policy manual (http://people.canonical.com/~cjwatson/ubuntu-policy/policy.html/ap-pkg-conffiles.html).

If a Ubuntu package is rejected for strictly following published Ubuntu policy, perhaps the published policy should be changed to reflect the reality.