Re: Cryptic messages from installers
Josip Rodin wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > This is just a mail filtering problem. A maintainer running a buildd
> > should be allowed to have several different gpg signatures, one for
> > his own packages, another one for the ported packages under his
> > responsability, so that both katie and upload queues mail
> > notifications to different addresses.
>
> But until you get all the buildd people to switch to that other system,
> upload queue daemon can't be changed, unless you want to annoy the uploaders
> with a couple of hundreds of mails...
Agreed, but at least it would be an annoyance under oneself's control.
If a day D is established to change the behaviour of katie, people
could at least work around the annoyance by using procmail filters or
whatever. The annoyance of receiving install reports from people
currently not using dpkg-buildpackage -m is more difficult to handle
and affects a greater number of people (I've received several of these
install reports).
To avoid this, we should probably coordinate the change between katie
and dpkg so that the new behaviour is followed only when the .changes
file has a format version >= someversion (where "someversion" is greater
than the current one in unstable). This way people running build
daemons who need more time to adapt their keys should just put
dpkg-dev in hold in the building machine.
Reply to: